How many judgments cite CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd.?

243 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (325 ITR 285), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 68, Section 250, Section 151.

CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd.

325 ITR 285High Court2010#358 most cited

What is CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. authority for?

Reassessment proceedings under Section 147 are invalid and void ab initio if initiated based on 'borrowed satisfaction' without the Assessing Officer's independent application of mind, or merely on documents already available on record without fresh tangible material.

243

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. · SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. · section 147 · section 148 · section 151 · reopening of assessment · borrowed satisfaction · independent application of mind · mere change of opinion · documents already on record · tangible material

Also reported as

149 Taxmann.com 22341 DTR 98

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 68 Section 250 Section 151 Section 142(1)Section 133(6)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 148(2)borrowed satisfaction first proviso to section 147 material facts necessary for assessment kelvinator tangible material mere change of opinion live link reason to believe reopening of assessment escapement of income income escaping assessment

Judgments citing CIT v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd.

M/S. Bna Commerce Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 154/KOL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Ankur Goyal, DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148

…d that the conclusions of the AO are at best a reproduction of the conclusion in the investigation report. Indeed it is a borrowed satisfaction. Besides the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decisions of CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. in [2010] 325 ITR 285 (Del) ,GRD Commodities Ltd Vs PCIT (2023) 149 taxmann.com 223(Cal), PCIT Vs Shodiman Investment Pvt Ltd (2018) 93 taxmann.com ITA Nos.154& 155/KOL/2025 M/s. BNA Commerce Pvt. Ltd.; A.Ys. 2013-14& 2014-15 153 (Bom) and Sarthak Securities Co Pvt Ltd. Vs ITO (2010) 329ITR 110(Del). 014. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order p…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. Karnani Solvex Private Limited, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 850/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 May 2025AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(4)

…without applying his mind, the Assessing Officer was not justified in invoking the provisions of Section 147 of the Act by issuing notice u/s 148 of the Act. On the similar issue, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 285 (Del.) held as under:- “The assessee in his original return of income had shown a long term capital gain of Rs.40,953/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Subsequently, on the basis of the information given by the Deputy Director of Income-tax (Investigation) that the assessee was allegedly the beneficiary…

Ambaji Avenues Private Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 9(1) (2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5216/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Ambaji Avenues Income Tax Officer, Private Limited, Ward-9(1)(2), A-109, Akshay Mittal Indl. Aaykar Bhawan, Premises, M.V. Road, Vs. Maharshi Karve Road, Sanjay Building No.5, Churchgate, Andheri (W), Maharashtra – 400 020 Maharashtra – 400 059 PAN: AAJCA8264G (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Ramesh Malpani, Ld. A.R. Revenue by : Shri Kiran Unavekar, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 16 . 01 .2025 Date of Pronouncement : 28 . 03 .2025 O R D E…

Prabhaben Nandlal Ratpiya, Keshod vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Junagadh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 16/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot17 Mar 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.16/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Hybrid Hearing) Prabhaben Nandlal Ratpiya, Vs. The Ito, “Pushpak”, Mahendrasinhji Chowk, Ward – 1, Street No.2, Ambawadi, Keshod – Junagadh 362220 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alspr3548M (Assessee) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Chetan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

…en directed to do so by a superior officer. Hon`ble Delhi High Court held that the AO cannot reopen the assessment merely on the basis of information received without applying his mind to the information and forming an opinion, CIT vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd, 325 ITR 285 (Del) Therefore, the reasons of the AO for reopening assessment should be based on direct and circumstantial evidence; such reasons could not be based on simply suspicion, rumor or gossip. 14. An error discovered on a reconsideration of the same material (and no more) does not give AO power to assume jurisdiction to make reassessment. The afores…

Balwant Singh Dhindsa, Adv. So Kartar Singh, #185 Street No. 11, Punia Colony, Sangrur, Punjab vs. ITO Ward Sangrur, Punjab

In the result, appeal of the assessee is

ITA 800/CHANDI/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, JCIT, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

…Ito in ITA no. 51/Asr/2012 vide order dated 05.09.2012 (Amritsar ITAT) b. Sh. Mohd Yousuf Wani vs. ITO in ITA No. 372/Asr/2009(Amritsar ITAT) c. Sh. Sanjeev Aggarwal vs. DCIT in ITA NO. 547/Asr/2011 (Amritsar ITAT) d. CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (Del HC) 325 ITR 285 e. CIT vs. Smt. Paramjit Kaur (P&H HC) 311 ITR 38 f. Geeta Garg vs. CIT, Patiala as reported in 51 IT Rep 215 (Punjab & Haryana HC) It was therefore, submitted that the facts of the case of the assessee are similar to the above cited citation wherein it has been held that when ld. AO records reasons for re-opening of the case of the assessee with…

DCIT, Central Circle, Dehradun vs. R.B. Enterprises, Dehradun

ITA 4/DDN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

…the u/s 143(3) of the Act was merely the change of opinion and the same is liable to be quashed. Further, Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Adani Exports vs. DCIT 240 ITR 224 and Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Sfil Stock broking Ltd. 325 ITR 285 has held that, "AO cannot reopen the assessment without applying his mind to the information and forming an opinion. The reasons must show the due application of mind to the information." 5.6 In the present factual matrix of the case, it is seen that, the appellaist has disclosed all the material facts and information regarding the addition made…

M/S. R.B. Enterprises, Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

ITA 3501/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

M/S. R.B. Enterprises, Dehradun vs. DCIT, Dehradun

ITA 3500/DEL/2017[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jan 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153A(1)(b)

Income Tax Officer, Kolkata vs. Alcom Investment Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 16/KOL/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Jan 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 45

…igation Wing and without application of his own mind to reopen the case. The Ld. Counsel cited a decision passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Kelvinator (320 ITR 561), decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (325 ITR 285), Sarthak Securities Ltd. (329 ITR 110) and Signature Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (338 ITR 51). 8. Upon hearing the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the respective parties, we have perused the order of Ld. CIT(A) and the facts of the case of the assessee. It is the case of the assessee that case of the assessee was reopened by issuing notice u/s 148 of th…

Begraj Agarwal & Ors HUF, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 34(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1370/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Jan 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Ito, Ward 34(1), Kolkata Begraj Agarwal & Ors. Huf Aaykar Bhavan Poorva, 110, Diamond Heritage, Unit No.609, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001 Shantipally, Kolkata-700107, Vs. West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabhb8295F Assessee By : Shri S.M. Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Amuldeep Kaur, Dr Date Of Hearing: 19.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.M. Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amuldeep Kaur, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 68

…the information available on the assessment record. In defence of his argument the ld. Authorized Representative relied on the following decisions: i. CIT vs. Smt Paramji Kaur (2009) 311 ITR 38 (Punjab and Haryana) ii. CIT vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd. (2010) 325 ITR 285 (Delhi) iii. ITO Vs. Sarthak Securities (P.) Ld. (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Delhi) iv. Signature Hotels P. Ld. Vs. ITO Another (2011) 338 IT 51 (supra) 338 ITR 51 v. Akshar Builders and Developers Vs. ACIT WP No. 14490 of 2018 (Bombay) vi. Ankita A. Choksey Vs. ITO (Bombay) WP No. 3344 of 2018 Begraj Agarwal & Ors Huf; A.Y. 2013-14 06. The ld. Authorize…

Sangeeta Devi Anchalia, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-32(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 236/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm Ito Sangeeta Devi Anchalia 2, Gariahat Road (South) 31-C, Jhowtalla Road, Park Aaykar Bhavan Dakshin, Cicus, Kolkata-700017, Vs. Kolkata-700068, West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Addpa0199C Assessee By : Shri Sunil Kumar Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rajat Datta, Dr Date Of Hearing: 03.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Datta, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)

…eceived and arriving at the conclusion without any independent application of mind and in fact a case of borrowed satisfaction. The case of the assessee find force from the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. SFILl Stock Broking Ltd.(2010) 325 ITR 285 and M/S Shreyans Jain, Huf Vs. ITO 357 ITR 330. Accordingly, taking into account the ratio laid down in the above decisions and the facts of the instant case at hand, we are of the view that the reopening of assessment u/s 147 of the Act is invalid and void ab initio. Accordingly, the proceedings u/s 147 of the Act and also the consequent order p…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2444/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.2442 To 2445/Del/2023 (Assessment Years 2013-14 To 2016-17) Dcit, Lotus Herbals Pvt. Ltd., Cc-20, Delhi. Room No.269A, 2 Nd Floor, Ara Vs. Centre, E-2, Jhandewalan, New Delhi-110055. Pan-Aaacl0198F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rohit Jain, Adv. & Shri Shivam Gupta, Ca Department By Sh. Mukesh Jha, Cit Dr & Ms. Pooja Swroop, Cit-Dr 29.09.2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: These Are Five Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-27, New Delhi. All Are Dated 12.06.2023 For Assessment Years As Tabulated As Under:

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

…the following legal decisions:  ACTT vs. Dhariya Construction Company 328 ITR 515 (SC)  Pr. CIT. Meenakshi Overseas (P.) Ltd. 395 ITR 677 (Del)  Well Trans Logistics India (P.) Lad. vs. ACTT [2024] 166 taxmann.com 72 (Def)  CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd: 325 ITR 285 (Del))  Pr. CIT vs. RMG Polyvinyl (1) Ltd. 396 ITR 5 (Del)  PCIT vs. G & G Pharma India Ltd. 384 ITR 147 (Del.)  CIT vs. Gulati Industrial Fabrication (P) Limited 217 CTR 494 (Del) [SLP Dismissed by SC in 1134/2009]  CIT vs. Fair Finvest L: 357 ITR 146 (Del)  CIT vs. Viniyas Finance & Investment Pvt Ltd 357 ITR 646 (Del) In view of the afore…

Cosmic Informatics Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Central Circle - 2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in appeal No

ITA 2443/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

Purushottamlal Singhania, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 36(5), Kolkata

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

ITA 731/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 147Section 148

…nce that the income has escaped assessment. The ld. Counsel has cited several decisions which are as follows: i) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Atul Jain [2008] 299 ITR 383 (Delhi)[23-05-2007] ii) Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Sfil Stock Broking Ltd. [2010] 325 ITR 285 (Delhi)[27-04-2010] iii) Income-tax Officer vs. Lakhmani Mewal Das [1976] 103 ITR 437 (SC)[30-03-1976] iv) Ganga Saran & Sons (P.) Ltd. vs. Income-tax Officer [1981] 6 Taxman 14 (SC)[23- 04-1981] v) Subhash Chander Goel vs. Income-tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Chandigarh [2016] 65 taxmann.com 216 (Chandigarh - Trib.)[18-11-2015] 4. Ld. DR supports the…

Shankar Construction, Panchgachia vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Purnea

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 565/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 565/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Shankar Construction,………………..…….……Appellant Panchgachia, Panchgachia-852124, Bihar [Pan:Abofs0800R] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………….……..……Respondent Ward-3(1), Purnea, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashok Kumar, Cit (Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: October 22, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: November 18, 2024 O R D E R

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

…is failure or omission to disclose fully and truly all material facts. We would, therefore, uphold the view of the majority and dismiss the appeal with costs. Reliance is also placed in the case of Commissioner of Income- tax v. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. [2010] 325 ITR 285 (Del), where the High Court has held that: 10. From the above, it is clear that the Assessing Officer referred to the information and the two directions as "reasons" on the basis of which he was proceeding to issue notice under Section 148. We are afraid that these cannot be the reasons for proceeding under Section 147/148 of the said Act. The fi…

Dcitcc6.2, Mumbai vs. Top Class Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 974/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal, Ld. A.R. a/wFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das, Ld. CIT DR

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

…in Raja Bahadur Motilal (P) Ltd. vs. K.R. Vishwanathan, ITO & Anr. (1990) 82 CTR (Bom) 381: (1990) 183 ITR 80 (Bom) and the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (2010) 233 CTR (Del) 69: (2010) 41 DTR (Del) 98: (2010) 325 ITR 285 (Del), the impugned order dt. 12th Dec., 2014 allowed the respondent-assessee's appeal. 8. Mr. Mohanty, learned counsel for the Revenue, submits that in view of the apex Court's decision in Asstt. CIT vs. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. (2007) 210 CTR (SC) 30: (2007) 291 ITR 500 (SC) is entitled to reopen an assessment for whatever reason.…

Top Class Capital Markets Private Limited, Bombay Mutual Building, Fort vs. ACIT Central Circle 6 (2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee i

ITA 709/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 115JSection 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 68

Kishori Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd., Bbd Bagh (East) vs. ITO Ward 2(1), Patna, Lok Nayak Bhawan

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

ITA 249/PAT/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna06 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 250

…- ITA no. 1319/Kol/2015 - 26.09.2018 g) Delhi High Court - PCIT vs Meenakshi Overseas P Ltd - 395 ITR 677 - 26.05.2017 h) Delhi High Court - CIT vs Insecticides (India) Ltd - ITA 608-609/2012 - 20.05.2013 i) Delhi High Court - CIT vs SFIL Stock Broking Ltd - 325 ITR 285 - 27.04.2010 Page 3 of 10 I.T.A. No.: 249/PAT/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Kishori Capital Markets Pvt. Ltd. j) Kolkata ITAT - Asit Kumar Patra vs ITO -ITA no. 2206/Kol/2019- 21.02.2020 2.3. We have gone through the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Calcutta Club Ltd. (supra) which has been filed by the assesse…

M/S Ganesh Ram Dokania, Patna vs. ACIT Central Circle-2, Patna

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal issue

ITA 263/PAT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153ASection 68

…In defense of argument the Ld. A.R relied on the following decisions namely M/S Hindusthan Lever Ltd. R. B. Wadkar, ACIT in [2004] 268 ITR 332 (Bom), PCIT Vs Meenakshi Overseas Pvt Ltd (2017) 82 taxmann.com 300 (Del), CIT vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. in [2010] 325 ITR 285 (Del) , PCIT Vs Shodiman Investment Pvt Ltd (2018) 93 taxmann.com 153 (Bom) and Sarthak Securities Co Pvt Ltd. Vs ITO (2010) 329 ITR 110 (Del). 4 I.T.A. No. 263/PAT/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Ganesh Ram Dokania 6. The Ld. D.R on the other hand submitted that while reopening the assessment only information is required to be there in the po…

The DCIT, Circle (International Taxation), Chandigarh vs. Sh. Manjeet Singh, Ludhiana

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed whereas, Cross

ITA 512/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 512/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dcit, Vs. Shri Manjeet Singh, बनाम Circle (International S/O Shri Harbir Singh Taxation), # 1460, Ward Number-8, Chandigarh Gahlewal, Ludhiana 141008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cdeps4087A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & C.O. No. 13/Chd/2022 ( In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 512/Chd/2022) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Manjeet Singh, Vs. The Dcit, बनाम S/O Shri Harbir Singh Circle (International # 1460, Ward Number-8, Taxation ), Gahlewal, Chandigarh Ludhiana 141008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cdeps4087A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Dharamvir, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148

…tigationWing, the same is not permissible in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of GG Pharma India Ltd., reported in 384 512-Chd-2022 & C.O.13-Chd-2022 Shri Manjeet Singh, Ludhiana 4 ITR 147 and SFIL Stock Broking Ltd., reported in 325 ITR 285, which has been followed by the Amritsar Bench in the case of M/s Holy Faith International Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 181/Asr/2017. 3. That even otherwise, the proceedings u/s 148 are also invalid as the notice u/s 148 was issued by the non- jurisdictional Assessing Officer and on the strength of the same notice u/s 148, the assessment as framed by the…