CIT v. Rajeev Sharma

336 ITR 678High Court2011#730 most cited

What is CIT v. Rajeev Sharma authority for?

It is mandatory for the Assessing Officer to issue a notice under Section 143(2) within the statutory period specified in Section 148, after applying mind to the material on record and being satisfied about escaped income. The provisions of Section 143(2) are mandatory in reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148.

139

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Rajeev Sharma · 336 ITR 678 · Section 143(2) · Section 148 · mandatory notice · reassessment proceedings · escaped income · assessment procedure · Allahabad High Court · 2011

Also reported as

192 Taxmann 197

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 147Section 292BBSection 144Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 274(2)section 243section 245hacasus omissussection 245csection 292bbsettlement applicationsection 245d(4)section 153(4)section 245dsection 244section 144ba

Judgments citing CIT v. Rajeev Sharma

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 64/JAB/2018[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

…within time. It has been further held that resort cannot be taken by the Revenue to section 292BH to give a go-bye to mandatory requirement of issuance of notice within the statutory fixed by the proviso to section I43(2) of the Act.” 5.5 CIT vs Rajeev Sharma 336 ITR 678, High court of Allahabad. “In view of above submissions and case laws, it has been established that no notice u/s 143(2) was issued in the present case and therefore the impugned assessment is liable to be annulled.” 5.6 M/s Sapthagiri Finance and Investments vs. ITO: TC(A). No. 159 of 2006 dated 17.07.2012 (Mad HC) [(2013) 90 DTR (Mad) 289] Rele…

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 63/JAB/2018[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

…within time. It has been further held that resort cannot be taken by the Revenue to section 292BH to give a go-bye to mandatory requirement of issuance of notice within the statutory fixed by the proviso to section I43(2) of the Act.” 5.5 CIT vs Rajeev Sharma 336 ITR 678, High court of Allahabad. “In view of above submissions and case laws, it has been established that no notice u/s 143(2) was issued in the present case and therefore the impugned assessment is liable to be annulled.” 5.6 M/s Sapthagiri Finance and Investments vs. ITO: TC(A). No. 159 of 2006 dated 17.07.2012 (Mad HC) [(2013) 90 DTR (Mad) 289] Rele…

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 62/JAB/2018[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

…within time. It has been further held that resort cannot be taken by the Revenue to section 292BH to give a go-bye to mandatory requirement of issuance of notice within the statutory fixed by the proviso to section I43(2) of the Act.” 5.5 CIT vs Rajeev Sharma 336 ITR 678, High court of Allahabad. “In view of above submissions and case laws, it has been established that no notice u/s 143(2) was issued in the present case and therefore the impugned assessment is liable to be annulled.” 5.6 M/s Sapthagiri Finance and Investments vs. ITO: TC(A). No. 159 of 2006 dated 17.07.2012 (Mad HC) [(2013) 90 DTR (Mad) 289] Rele…

Jabalpur Development Authority, Jabalpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1), Jabalpur

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 61/JAB/2018[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur01 Dec 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147

…within time. It has been further held that resort cannot be taken by the Revenue to section 292BH to give a go-bye to mandatory requirement of issuance of notice within the statutory fixed by the proviso to section I43(2) of the Act.” 5.5 CIT vs Rajeev Sharma 336 ITR 678, High court of Allahabad. “In view of above submissions and case laws, it has been established that no notice u/s 143(2) was issued in the present case and therefore the impugned assessment is liable to be annulled.” 5.6 M/s Sapthagiri Finance and Investments vs. ITO: TC(A). No. 159 of 2006 dated 17.07.2012 (Mad HC) [(2013) 90 DTR (Mad) 289] Rele…

Sandeep Kumar Shah, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 50(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 7/KOL/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Nov 2023AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 07/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sandeep Kumar Shah Income Tax Officer, Ward – P-281, Cit Road, Scheme Vi(M) Vs 50(1), Kolkata Kakurgachi Kolkata - 700054 [Pan : Aprps6509J] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca/Amit Agrawal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ankur Goyal, Addl. Cit, D/R सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18/10/2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 30/11/2023 आदेश/O R D E R Per Dr. Manish Borad: The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Cit(A)”) Dt. 30/11/2022, Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (“The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit (Appeals) U/S 250 Confirming The Additions & Disallowances Made By Learned Assessing Officer Is Contrary To The Law & Facts Of The Case. 2. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals) Erred In Denial Of Exemption Of Long-Term Capital Gain Of Rs. 41,86,458/- U/S 10(38) Of The Act Is Bad In Law & In Facts. 3. That The Learned Cit (Appeals) Failed To Appreciate That The Transaction Of Purchase / Sale Was Genuine & All The Requisite Prescribed Documents Submitted Were In Existence & Hence The Addition / Disallowance Has No Legs To Stand & Deserves To Be Held Ab Initio Null & Void.

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, FCA/Amit AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ankur Goyal, Addl. CIT, D/R
Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…cial Telecommunications reported in (2010) 323 ITR 249 (Del); Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Solarpur Cold Storage P Ltd (2014) 50 Taxmann.com 105 (All); Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma reported in [2011] 336 ITR 678 (All.). Since the Assessing Officer did not issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act within the specified time period, therefore, the Assessing Officer could not have assumed jurisdiction to frame the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act and, therefore, the impugned assessment order is bad in law and the same is accordingly held to be non-est. Since we hav…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Delhi vs. M/S Dart Infrabuild (P) Ltd

ITA/10/2022HC Delhi17 Nov 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 146Section 147Section 148

…fter the return filed by the assessee is actually scrutinised by the Assessing Officer. 14. The interplay of sections 143 (2) and 148 of the Act formed the subject matter of at least two decisions of the Allahabad High Court in CIT v. Rajeev Sharma [2011] 336 ITR 678 (All) it was held that a plain reading of section 148 of the Act reveals that within the statutory period specified therein, it shall be incumbent to send a notice under section 143(2) of the Act. It was observed (page 687): “The provisions contained in sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act is mandatory and the Legislature in its wisdom…

Ballu Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -65(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 800/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…. In tax appeal No. 435 of 2011, (Gujrat High Court) 5. CIT vs. Sukhini P. Modi reported at (2014) 367 ITR 682 (Hon'ble Gujarat High court), 6. CIT vs. K M Ravji in Tax Appeal No. 771 of 2010 order dated 18.07.2011 (Gujarat High Court) 7. CIT vs Rajeev Sharma 336 ITR 678, (High court of Allahabad) 8. M/s Sapthagiri Finance and Investments vs. ITO: TC(A). No. 159 of 2006 dated 17.07.2012 (Mad HC) [(2013) 90 DTR (Mad) 289] 9. CIT Vs. C. Pakniappan 284 ITR 257 (Hon'ble Madras High Court) 10. CIT Chennai Vs. Alstom T&D India Ltd. in Tax Case (Appeals) No. 1183 and 1186 of 2006 dtd. 3.9.2012 (Hon'ble Madras High Court…

Ballu Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -65(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 799/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…. In tax appeal No. 435 of 2011, (Gujrat High Court) 5. CIT vs. Sukhini P. Modi reported at (2014) 367 ITR 682 (Hon'ble Gujarat High court), 6. CIT vs. K M Ravji in Tax Appeal No. 771 of 2010 order dated 18.07.2011 (Gujarat High Court) 7. CIT vs Rajeev Sharma 336 ITR 678, (High court of Allahabad) 8. M/s Sapthagiri Finance and Investments vs. ITO: TC(A). No. 159 of 2006 dated 17.07.2012 (Mad HC) [(2013) 90 DTR (Mad) 289] 9. CIT Vs. C. Pakniappan 284 ITR 257 (Hon'ble Madras High Court) 10. CIT Chennai Vs. Alstom T&D India Ltd. in Tax Case (Appeals) No. 1183 and 1186 of 2006 dtd. 3.9.2012 (Hon'ble Madras High Court…

M/S. Osian Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 375/KOL/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 May 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.375/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Osian Stock Broking Pvt. Ltd................................................……Appellant C/O S M Surana Advocate, Unit No.1501, 15Th Floor, Diamond Heritage, 16, Strand Road, Kol-1. [Pan: Aaaco3479N] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Kolkata.............................……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Sunil Surana, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 15, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 12, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.05.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Lower Authorities In Treating The Unsecured Loans Of Rs.15,00,000/- Taken By The Assessee As Unexplained Income Of The Assessee. 3. The Assessee Has Contested The Impugned Addition On Various Ground, Inter Alia, That The Assessing Officer Had No Reason To Believe

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

…cial Telecommunications reported in (2010) 323 ITR 249 (Del); Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Solarpur Cold Storage P Ltd (2014) 50 Taxmann.com 105 (All); Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma reported in [2011] 336 ITR 678 (All.). Since the Assessing Officer did not issue notice u/s 143(2) of the Act within the specified time period, therefore, the Assessing Officer could not have assumed jurisdiction to frame the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act and, therefore, the impugned assessment order is bad in law and the same is accordingly held to be non-est. Since we hav…

Shyam Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4908/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Sr. D. R
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 68Section 69C

…income rr or has "computed excessive loss" or has "underpaid the tax in any manner" .. Identical view has been held in decisions of DIT v. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications 323 ITR 249 (Del) (Para 8) and CIT v. Rajeev Sharma (2011) 336 ITR 678 (All.) Therefore, it is evident from perusal of assessment order and above facts, no notice under section 143(2} of IT Act was ever issued after examination of return of income and audited financial statements as discussed above. 3. Recording of reason after taking approval under section 151 of IT Act: In para 14 of reason recorded (PB 19). there…

Optimist Electronics P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-19(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4907/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Sr. D. R
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 68Section 69C

…income rr or has "computed excessive loss" or has "underpaid the tax in any manner" .. Identical view has been held in decisions of DIT v. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications 323 ITR 249 (Del) (Para 8) and CIT v. Rajeev Sharma (2011) 336 ITR 678 (All.) Therefore, it is evident from perusal of assessment order and above facts, no notice under section 143(2} of IT Act was ever issued after examination of return of income and audited financial statements as discussed above. 3. Recording of reason after taking approval under section 151 of IT Act: In para 14 of reason recorded (PB 19). there…

Surender Kumar Goel, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-60(5), New Delhi

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

ITA 638/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg

For Appellant: Shri Prakesh Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 58Section 69C

…a), this Court has also discussed the distinction between a failure to 'issue' notice and a failure to 'serve' a notice on an Assessee. It was held, after noticing the decisions of the Allahabad High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Rajeev Sharma (2011) 336 ITR 678 and Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Lucknow v. Salarpur Cold Storage (P.) Ltd. [2014] 50 taxmann.com 105 (All.) and the decision of the Madras High Court in Sapthagiri Finance & Investments v. Income Tax Officer (2013) 90 DTR (Mad) 289), that Section 292 BB of the Act would apply insofar as failure of 'service' of notice was concerned and not with…

Shrimati. Harbhajan Kaur, Jalandhar vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1 (20, Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 104/ASR/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 69

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 104/Asr/2021 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Smt. Harbhajan Kaur, Vs. Income Tax Officer, W/o Sh. Tarlok Singh, Ward-1(2), 1-Virk Enclave, Nakodar Jalandhar Road, Jalandhar (Punjab) [PAN: EPIPB 8277M] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CA Respondent by : Mrs. Kanchan Garg, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 17.11.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 20.12.2022 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee ag…

Shyam Products Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 23(3), New Delhi

The appeal is allowed and the impugned assessment order is set aside

ITA 7457/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmashyam Products Pvt Ltd. New Vs. Ito, Ward-23(3) Delhi New Delhi Appellant Respondent Pan: Aadcs0943E

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Shyam Products Pvt Ltd. New Vs. ITO, Ward-23(3) Delhi New Delhi Appellant Respondent PAN: AADCS0943E Assessee by Sh. Mukul Garg, Adv. Revenue by Shri Abhishek Kumar, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 20.10.2022 Date of pronouncement: 07.11.2022 ORDER Per Anubhav Sharma, JM : The appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 10/10/2017 in appeal no. 301/17-18 for assessment year 2008-09 passed by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-28, New Delhi (hereinafter re…

Neeraj Kumar, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Barot

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated above

ITA 3067/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3067/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Neeraj Kumar Ito Vs. House No. 5, Rana Farm Barot. House, Manshi Vihar, Sector-23, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Dmtpk8828J अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 234A

…I.T.A.No.3067/Del/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3067/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Neeraj Kumar ITO Vs. House No. 5, Rana Farm Barot. House, Manshi Vihar, Sector-23, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. PAN No. DMTPK8828J अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Somil Aggarwal, Adv. िनधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee by Ms. Garima Sharma, Sr. DR राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue by सुनवाईक"तारीख/ Date of hearing: 07.06.2022 29.08.2022 उ"ोषणाक"तारीख/Pronouncement on आदेश /O R D E R…

Girdhar Gopal Rastogi, Mirzapur vs. I.T.O. Ward 3(1), Mirzapur

In the result, the additional ground of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 162/ALLD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad13 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Raoassessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Girdhar Gopal Rastogi, V. Commissioner Of Income Tax Dhundi Katra, Mirzapur, U.P. (Appeal), Allahabad Pan-Aanpr8525N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Mr. R.N. Yadav, Adv & Mr. R.K. Kalyani, C.A. Respondent By: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.05.2022

For Appellant: Mr. R.N. Yadav, Adv & Mr. R.KFor Respondent: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 133ASection 254(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD ‘SMC’ BENCH, ALLAHABAD BEFORE SHRI.VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 Sri Girdhar Gopal Rastogi, v. Commissioner of Income Tax Dhundi Katra, Mirzapur, U.P. (Appeal), Allahabad PAN-AANPR8525N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Mr. R.N. Yadav, Adv & Mr. R.K. Kalyani, C.A. Respondent by: Mr. A.K. Singh, Sr. DR Date of hearing: 26.04.2022 Date of pronouncement: 13.05.2022 O R D E R SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 05.09.2019 of CIT(A), Allahabad for the assessment year 2012…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-1 vs. M/S Consortium Nussli Comfort Net

Appeal is dismissed

ITA/63/2022HC Delhi25 Mar 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SHARMA

Section 124(3)Section 143(2)Section 292B

…to condone the failure or delay in issuing the statutory notice required to be issued under Section 143(2) of the Act. Section 292BB deals with failure of service of notice and not with regard to failure to issue notice. [See: CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma, [2011] 336 ITR 678 (All.HC), CIT vs. Ponorama Builders (P.) Ltd., [2014] 224 Taxman 203 (Gujarat)(MAG.) and CIT vs. Salarpur Cold Storage (P.) Ltd., [2014] 50 taxman.com 105 (Allahabad)]. 7. The Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. Laxman Das Khandelwal (supra) has clearly stated that the scope of Section 292BB is to make service of notice having…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Indrani Prasad, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 467/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

…ITA Nos 409 and 467 of 2020 Indrani Prasad New Delhi IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri A.M. Alankamony, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member ITA No.409 & 467/Hyd/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt.Indrani Prasad Vs. A.C.I.T. New Delhi Central Circle-3 PAN:AANPI5216K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) A.C.I.T. Vs. Indrani Prasad Central Circle-3 New Delhi Hyderabad PAN:AANPI5216K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CA Revenue by: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 10/01/2022 Dat…

Indrani Prasad, New Delhi vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 409/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

…ITA Nos 409 and 467 of 2020 Indrani Prasad New Delhi IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad (Through Video Conferencing) Before Shri A.M. Alankamony, Accountant Member and Shri S.S. Godara, Judicial Member ITA No.409 & 467/Hyd/2020 Assessment Year: 2010-11 Smt.Indrani Prasad Vs. A.C.I.T. New Delhi Central Circle-3 PAN:AANPI5216K Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) A.C.I.T. Vs. Indrani Prasad Central Circle-3 New Delhi Hyderabad PAN:AANPI5216K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CA Revenue by: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR) Date of hearing: 10/01/2022 Dat…

ACIT, Circle-19(2), New Delhi vs. P & R Infraprojects Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4944/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jan 2022AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri V.K. Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Parikshit Singh, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…of the Act only after the return filed by the Assessee is actually scrutinised by the AO. 14. The interplay of Sections 143 (2) and 148 of the Act formed the subject matter of at least two decisions of the Allahabad High Court. In CIT v. Rajeev Sharma (2011) 336 ITR 678 (All.) it was held that a plain reading of Section 148 of the Act reveals that within the statutory period specified therein, it shall be incumbent to send a notice under Section 143(2) of the Act. It was observed: "the provisions contained in sub-Section (2) of Section 143 is mandatory and the legislature in their wisdom by using the word 'reaso…