CIT v. Norton Motors

275 ITR 595High Court2005#1583 most cited

What is CIT v. Norton Motors authority for?

Section 292B of the Income-tax Act applies only to technical defects and omissions, not to fundamental errors that vitiate the assessment itself. A reassessment notice, such as one issued under Section 148, if addressed to an incorrect person or in the wrong name, is a jurisdictional defect that invalidates the entire assessment and cannot be cured by Section 292B.

71

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Norton Motors · Section 292B · Section 148 notice · incorrect person · wrong name · jurisdictional defect · reassessment invalid · technical defect · substantive error · vitiated assessment

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 10(38)Section 124Section 132Section 132(4)Section 132A

Issues it is cited on

section 245c(1)section 23(4)section 147(1)section 142(3)section 4(1)cost plus methodsection 193section 196section 245csection 127(2)section 124(3)section 271aaa

Judgments citing CIT v. Norton Motors

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 5022/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

…ment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 356/[2015] 370 ITR 288 (Delhi) (Civil Appeal 4317/2014 whereagainst was dismissed on 2nd November, 2017), (d) CIT v. Norton Motors [2005] 14b Taxman 701 275 ITR 595 (Punjab & Haryana High Court), (e) CIT v. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 180 Taxman 23/3 iO ITR 71 (Punj. & Har.) and (/) Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT [2005] 145 Taxman 1 56 [2006] 280 ITR 396 (All), it had been held that such a defect cannot be treated as a procedural one and once it is found that the assessment is framed in the name of a non-…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 5021/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

…ment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 356/[2015] 370 ITR 288 (Delhi) (Civil Appeal 4317/2014 whereagainst was dismissed on 2nd November, 2017), (d) CIT v. Norton Motors [2005] 14b Taxman 701 275 ITR 595 (Punjab & Haryana High Court), (e) CIT v. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 180 Taxman 23/3 iO ITR 71 (Punj. & Har.) and (/) Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT [2005] 145 Taxman 1 56 [2006] 280 ITR 396 (All), it had been held that such a defect cannot be treated as a procedural one and once it is found that the assessment is framed in the name of a non-…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 5020/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

…ment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 356/[2015] 370 ITR 288 (Delhi) (Civil Appeal 4317/2014 whereagainst was dismissed on 2nd November, 2017), (d) CIT v. Norton Motors [2005] 14b Taxman 701 275 ITR 595 (Punjab & Haryana High Court), (e) CIT v. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 180 Taxman 23/3 iO ITR 71 (Punj. & Har.) and (/) Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT [2005] 145 Taxman 1 56 [2006] 280 ITR 396 (All), it had been held that such a defect cannot be treated as a procedural one and once it is found that the assessment is framed in the name of a non-…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 4561/DEL/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

…ment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 356/[2015] 370 ITR 288 (Delhi) (Civil Appeal 4317/2014 whereagainst was dismissed on 2nd November, 2017), (d) CIT v. Norton Motors [2005] 14b Taxman 701 275 ITR 595 (Punjab & Haryana High Court), (e) CIT v. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 180 Taxman 23/3 iO ITR 71 (Punj. & Har.) and (/) Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT [2005] 145 Taxman 1 56 [2006] 280 ITR 396 (All), it had been held that such a defect cannot be treated as a procedural one and once it is found that the assessment is framed in the name of a non-…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 4560/DEL/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

…ment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 356/[2015] 370 ITR 288 (Delhi) (Civil Appeal 4317/2014 whereagainst was dismissed on 2nd November, 2017), (d) CIT v. Norton Motors [2005] 14b Taxman 701 275 ITR 595 (Punjab & Haryana High Court), (e) CIT v. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 180 Taxman 23/3 iO ITR 71 (Punj. & Har.) and (/) Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT [2005] 145 Taxman 1 56 [2006] 280 ITR 396 (All), it had been held that such a defect cannot be treated as a procedural one and once it is found that the assessment is framed in the name of a non-…

Lg Electronics Inc., Korea (Lgek), Noida vs. DCIT, Circle- 2(2)(1), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in:

ITA 4559/DEL/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2022AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Anand, CIT- DR
Section 144C(13)Section 147Section 234ASection 263Section 271(1)(c)

…ment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 247 CTR 500 (Delhi), (c) CIT v. Dimension Apparels (P.) Ltd. [2014] 52 taxmann.com 356/[2015] 370 ITR 288 (Delhi) (Civil Appeal 4317/2014 whereagainst was dismissed on 2nd November, 2017), (d) CIT v. Norton Motors [2005] 14b Taxman 701 275 ITR 595 (Punjab & Haryana High Court), (e) CIT v. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 180 Taxman 23/3 iO ITR 71 (Punj. & Har.) and (/) Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT [2005] 145 Taxman 1 56 [2006] 280 ITR 396 (All), it had been held that such a defect cannot be treated as a procedural one and once it is found that the assessment is framed in the name of a non-…

ACIT, Central Circle-13, New Delhi vs. Pride Residency (P) Ltd. (in the Case of Spn Milk Products Inds. P.Ltd.), New Delhi

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4182/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Dec 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2006-07

For Appellant: Sh. V.K. Dhingra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. T Kipgen, Sr. DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 264

…(2012) 247 CTR (Delhi) 500 (Civil Appeal 285/2014,Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dimension Apparels (P) Ltd.(2015) 370 ITR 288 (Civil Appeal 43 17/2014 where against SLP was dismissed on 2nd November, 2017), Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. Norton Motors (2005) 275 ITR 595 (Punjab & Haryana High Court),CIT Vs. Harjinder Kaur(2009) 222 CTR (P&H) 254 andSri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2006) 280 ITR 396 (All), it had been held that such a defect cannot be treated as a procedural one and once it is found that the assessment is framed in the name of a non- existent entity, it does not re…

M/S. Gyanshankar Investment & Trading Co. P. Ltd.(Before Amalgamation M/S. Stellar Credit& E-Trading P. Ltd), Mumbai vs. The DCIT Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1584/MUM/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vishnu Agarwal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Salil Mishra, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…he company was signed by someone other than the authorized person. It was observed that the question was of removal of defect, which could be rectified. Reference was made to another decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CIT v. Norton Motors [2005] 275 ITR 595. 44. Bombay High Court in Prime Securities Ltd. v. Varinder Mehta, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (2009) 317 ITR 27 (Bom.) has observed that Section 292B of the Act makes it clear that a return of income shall not be treated as invalid merely by reason of any mistake, defect or omission .if the return of income is in substance and effect in…

M/S. Emta Coal Ltd., ( Erstwhile Known As M/S. Eastern Mineral & Trading Agency ), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Central Circle - 3(1), Kolakta

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2422/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Sri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble) Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Emta Coal Ltd…………………………………………..............................…….............Appellant 5B, Nandlal Basu Sarani Kolkata – 700 071 [Pan : Aacce 3506 G]

Section 132Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

…l as the order passed u/s 144/147 be declared ab proceedings as well as the order passed u/s 144/147 be declared ab initio void. For this proposition, he relied on the following case laws: he relied on the following case laws: i) CIT Vs. Norton Motors (2005) 275 ITR 595 (P&H); CIT Vs. Norton Motors (2005) 275 ITR 595 (P&H); ii) P. N. Shashi Kumar & Ors. Vs. CIT (1988) 170 ITR 80 P. N. Shashi Kumar & Ors. Vs. CIT (1988) 170 ITR 80 iii) Pr. CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Civil Appeal No.5409 of 2019 Pr. CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Civil Appeal No.5409 of 2019 Pr. CIT Vs. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Civil Ap…

Pr Commissioner of vs. M/S Quantech Global Services Ltd

ITA/439/2018HC Karnataka04 Feb 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,V SRISHANANDA

Section 143(2)Section 260Section 268

…ncome, assessment, notice, summons or other proceedings is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act. 13. The Punjab & Haryana High Court stated the effect of this provision in CIT Vs. Norton Motors, 275 ITR 595 in the following manner:- “A reading of the above reproduced provision makes it clear that a mistake, defect or 12 omission in the return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding is not sufficient to invalidate an action taken by the competent authority, provided that such return of income,…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore vs. M/S R R Gold Palace, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA

ITA 906/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 124(3)Section 153ASection 170

…e ITA Nos.903, 905, 906 & CO Nos.55, 57 & 58/Bang/2018 M/s. R.R. Gold Palace, Bengaluru Page 11 of 25 any assessment against a 'dead person'. The order of the Tribunal is therefore, clearly unsustainable - CIT v. Orton Motors [2006] 200 CTR [P&H] 604; [2005] 275 ITR 595 [P&H], CIT vs. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 222 CTR [P&H] 254; [2009] 19 DTR [P&H] 211 and Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh vs. CIT [2005] 196 CTR [All] 416; [2006] 280 ITR 396 [all] relied on" 5.8 I also find that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of INTEL TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD., in 380 ITR 272 [Kar] has also taken the same view o…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore vs. M/S R R Gold Palace, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA

ITA 903/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 124(3)Section 153ASection 170

…e ITA Nos.903, 905, 906 & CO Nos.55, 57 & 58/Bang/2018 M/s. R.R. Gold Palace, Bengaluru Page 11 of 25 any assessment against a 'dead person'. The order of the Tribunal is therefore, clearly unsustainable - CIT v. Orton Motors [2006] 200 CTR [P&H] 604; [2005] 275 ITR 595 [P&H], CIT vs. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 222 CTR [P&H] 254; [2009] 19 DTR [P&H] 211 and Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh vs. CIT [2005] 196 CTR [All] 416; [2006] 280 ITR 396 [all] relied on" 5.8 I also find that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of INTEL TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD., in 380 ITR 272 [Kar] has also taken the same view o…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Bangalore vs. M/S R R Gold Palace, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA

ITA 905/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Aug 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha, Accountantmember & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 124(3)Section 153ASection 170

…e ITA Nos.903, 905, 906 & CO Nos.55, 57 & 58/Bang/2018 M/s. R.R. Gold Palace, Bengaluru Page 11 of 25 any assessment against a 'dead person'. The order of the Tribunal is therefore, clearly unsustainable - CIT v. Orton Motors [2006] 200 CTR [P&H] 604; [2005] 275 ITR 595 [P&H], CIT vs. Harjinder Kaur [2009] 222 CTR [P&H] 254; [2009] 19 DTR [P&H] 211 and Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh vs. CIT [2005] 196 CTR [All] 416; [2006] 280 ITR 396 [all] relied on" 5.8 I also find that the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of INTEL TECHNOLOGY INDIA PVT. LTD., in 380 ITR 272 [Kar] has also taken the same view o…

Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 633/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2009-10 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 8(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Acipm 3813 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Vikash Modi Revenue By: Smt. V. Aparna Date Of Hearing: 04/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2019 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Is An Appeal Of The Assessee For The Ay 2009-10 Against The Order Of Cit(A) – 8, Hyderabad, Dated, 16/02/2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Had Sold A Property Situated At Kondapur Grampanchayat, Serilingampally Mandal, Rr District Vide Sale Deed No. 4100/2008 Dated 5Th June, 2008 For A Consideration Of Rs. 15,48,000/-, Whereas The Guideline Value Of The Property As Adopted By The Stamp Valuation Authority Was Rs. 50,56,000/-. Since The Assessee Did Not Offer Any Capital Gains On This Transaction To Tax, Ao Initiated Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 On 24/03/2016, Which Was Served On The Assessee By Way Of Affixture At The Last Known Address & Thereafter Notice U/S 142(1) Was Also Issued On 09/05/2016. Since There Was No Reply From The Assessee, A 2 I.T.A. No. 633/Hyd/18 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyd..

For Appellant: Shri Vikash ModiFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)Section 50C

…for the assessee placed reliance upon the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi [144 ITR 954] (All); ii. PN Sasikumar and others Vs. CIT [170 ITR 80] (Ker); iii. CIT Vs. Shital Prasad Karag Prasad [280 ITR 541] (All); iv. CIT Vs. Norton Motors [275 ITR 595] (P&H) 4. Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below to submit that the department has taken steps to serve the notice on the assessee and since the notice was un-served, it was served by affixture at the address given by the assessees in their returns of income and therefore the notices are validly served. 5. Having…

Payal Jindal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Toshniwala, ARFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292BSection 50C

…for the assessee placed reliance upon the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi [144 ITR 954] (All); ii. PN Sasikumar and others Vs. CIT [170 ITR 80] (Ker); iii. CIT Vs. Shital Prasad Karag Prasad [280 ITR 541] (All); iv. CIT Vs. Norton Motors [275 ITR 595] (P&H) 4. Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below to submit that the department has taken steps to serve the notice on the assessee and since the notice was un-served, it was served by affixture at the address given by the assessees in their returns of income and therefore the notices are validly served. 5. Havi…

Rajkumar Jindal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 56/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Toshniwala, ARFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292BSection 50C

…for the assessee placed reliance upon the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi [144 ITR 954] (All); ii. PN Sasikumar and others Vs. CIT [170 ITR 80] (Ker); iii. CIT Vs. Shital Prasad Karag Prasad [280 ITR 541] (All); iv. CIT Vs. Norton Motors [275 ITR 595] (P&H) 4. Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below to submit that the department has taken steps to serve the notice on the assessee and since the notice was un-served, it was served by affixture at the address given by the assessees in their returns of income and therefore the notices are validly served. 5. Havi…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune vs. M/S. Amdocs Development Centre India Pvt.Ltd, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 398/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 376/Pun/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &
Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 80ISection 92C

…n of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceedings is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act." 13. The Punjab & Haryana High Court stated the effect of this provision in CIT Vs. Norton Motors, 275 ITR 595 in the following manner:- A.Y.2011-12 "A reading of the above reproduced provision makes it clear that a mistake, defect or omission in the return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding is not sufficient to invalidate an action taken by the competent authority, provided that such return of income, assessment, notice, summons…

Amdocs Development Centre India LLP (Successor of Amdocs Development Centre India P Ltd.), Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 376/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 376/Pun/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri P.J. Pardiwalla &
Section 10ASection 10A(7)Section 143(2)Section 234BSection 80ISection 92C

…n of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceedings is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act." 13. The Punjab & Haryana High Court stated the effect of this provision in CIT Vs. Norton Motors, 275 ITR 595 in the following manner:- A.Y.2011-12 "A reading of the above reproduced provision makes it clear that a mistake, defect or omission in the return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding is not sufficient to invalidate an action taken by the competent authority, provided that such return of income, assessment, notice, summons…

V3S Infratech Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3643/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CA & Shri AjayFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Bansal, Sr.D.R
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 292B

…summons or other proceedings is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act.” 13. The Punjab & Haryana High Court stated the effect of this provision in CIT vs. Norton Motors (2006) 200 CTR (P&H) 604 : (2005) 275 ITR 595 (P&H) in the following manner : “A reading of the above reproduced provision makes it clear that a mistake, defect or omission in the return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding is not sufficient to invalidate an action taken by the competent authority, provided that such return of income, assessment, notice, summons or othe…

Value First Digital Media Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2183/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. R.K Pandaassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143Section 250(5)

…n of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceedings is in substance and effect in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act.” 12. The Punjab & Haryana High Court stated the effect of this provision in CIT Vs. Norton Motors, 275 ITR 595 in the 11 following manner:- “A reading of the above reproduced provision makes it clear that a mistake, defect or omission in the return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other proceeding is not sufficient to invalidate an action taken by the competent authority, provided that such return of income, assessment, notice, summons or other…