Commissioner of Income Tax v. BharatkumarModi

246 ITR 693High Court2000#10403 most cited

What is Commissioner of Income Tax v. BharatkumarModi authority for?

Proceedings are a nullity when the authority initiating them lacks the fundamental power to do so. Conversely, an order is not a nullity if it arises from an irregular exercise of existing jurisdiction, such as failing to confront the assessee with evidence.

10

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Bharatkumar Modi · lack of jurisdiction · irregular exercise of jurisdiction · nullity of proceedings · void ab initio · power to have seisin · Section 124 · Section 120 · Section 143(3) · Section 142

Sections most often in play

Section 124Section 127Section 143(3)Section 10(38)Section 115WDSection 115WESection 120Section 139

Issues it is cited on

section 115wdsection 115wesection 124section 120section 127service of noticeincome-tax officersection 12section 142section 115section 139section 11

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. BharatkumarModi

Kunshan Q Tech Microelectronics (India) Pvt. Ltd., Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, Central Circle-30, Delhi

ITA 5356/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2026AY 2021-22
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 148Section 153

…onfer jurisdiction upon the assessee company which establishes the fact that there is an inherent lack of jurisdiction and the same cannot be cured under any provision of law. As held by a Division Bench of Bombay High Court in CIT v. Bharat kumar Modi [2000] 246 ITR 693/113 Тахтап 386 wherein the well settled principle of law was discussed setting out the difference between lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of authority/jurisdiction, it was held that "Proceedings are a nullity when the authority taking it, has a no power to have seisin over the case", therefore, in the instant case, the Ld. PCIT-10, De…

Mahavir Singh, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-8(2), New Delhi

ITA 8602/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON'BLE (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri R.R. Singhla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anshul, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…opinion/belief was wrong, it would not affect the initial initiation of proceedings by ITO, Dimapur, who had passed the assessment orders in the second round. 5 39. A Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. BharatkumarModi 2000) 246 ITR 693, referred to the well settled principle of law; setting out the difference between lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of authority/ jurisdiction. Proceedings are a nullity when the authority taking it, has a no power to have seisin over the case. But an order is not a nullity or in exercise of void abintio jurisdiction, when the Assessin…

Sri. Annesh, Udupi vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-1, Chikmangalur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1179/BANG/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 124Section 127Section 144Section 147Section 234

…d opinion/belief was wrong, it would not affect the initial initiation of proceedings by ITO, Dimapur, who had passed the assessment orders in the second round. 39. A Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. BharatkumarModi (2000) 246 ITR 693, referred to the well settled principle of law; setting out the difference between lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of authority/ jurisdiction. Proceedings are a nullity when the authority taking it, has a no power to have seisin over the case. But an order is not a nullity or in exercise of void abintio jurisdiction, when the Assessin…

Everest Organics Ltd vs. The Commissioner of I.T., Hyderabad

ITTA/9/2005HC Telangana21 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 143(1)(a)

…n to the decision rendered by the High Court of Bombay in the matter of Bharatkumar Modi (supra) to submit that when the proper 2 (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 3 (2001) 165 CTR (All) 565 = (2000) 246 ITR 560 (All) 4 (2000) 164 CTR (Bom) 273 = (2000) 246 ITR 693 (Bom) = (2000) 113 TAXMAN 386 (Bom) 12 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters opportunity of hearing has been given to the assessee the entire annulment of assessment cannot be justified and even if certain wrong is committed the entirety of the assessment order cannot be said to be annulled. Therefore, the question of law is required to…

Neelachal I.Nigam L vs. Asst.Comnr.of I.Tax

ITA/8/2005HC Orissa17 Nov 2021

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Section 143(1)(a)

…n to the decision rendered by the High Court of Bombay in the matter of Bharatkumar Modi (supra) to submit that when the proper 2 (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 3 (2001) 165 CTR (All) 565 = (2000) 246 ITR 560 (All) 4 (2000) 164 CTR (Bom) 273 = (2000) 246 ITR 693 (Bom) = (2000) 113 TAXMAN 386 (Bom) 12 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters opportunity of hearing has been given to the assessee the entire annulment of assessment cannot be justified and even if certain wrong is committed the entirety of the assessment order cannot be said to be annulled. Therefore, the question of law is required to…

C. Sanyasi Raju vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Vizag

ITTA/7/2005HC Telangana21 Nov 2017

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

Section 143(1)(a)

…n to the decision rendered by the High Court of Bombay in the matter of Bharatkumar Modi (supra) to submit that when the proper 2 (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 3 (2001) 165 CTR (All) 565 = (2000) 246 ITR 560 (All) 4 (2000) 164 CTR (Bom) 273 = (2000) 246 ITR 693 (Bom) = (2000) 113 TAXMAN 386 (Bom) 12 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters opportunity of hearing has been given to the assessee the entire annulment of assessment cannot be justified and even if certain wrong is committed the entirety of the assessment order cannot be said to be annulled. Therefore, the question of law is required to…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

ITTA/28/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

Section 143(1)(a)

…n to the decision rendered by the High Court of Bombay in the matter of Bharatkumar Modi (supra) to submit that when the proper 2 (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 3 (2001) 165 CTR (All) 565 = (2000) 246 ITR 560 (All) 4 (2000) 164 CTR (Bom) 273 = (2000) 246 ITR 693 (Bom) = (2000) 113 TAXMAN 386 (Bom) 12 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters opportunity of hearing has been given to the assessee the entire annulment of assessment cannot be justified and even if certain wrong is committed the entirety of the assessment order cannot be said to be annulled. Therefore, the question of law is required to…

Commssioner of Income Tax Delhi-Xvi vs. S.S. Ahluwalia

ITA - 255 / 2002HC Delhi14 Mar 2014
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…rs in the second round. 2014:DHC:1423-DB ITA 255/2002 + connected Page 33 of 61 39. A Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. BharatkumarModi (2000) 246 ITR 693, referred to the well settled principle of law; setting out the difference between lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of authority/ jurisdiction. Proceedings are a nullity when the authority taking it, has a no power to have seisin over the case. But an order is not a nullity or in exercise of void abintio jurisdiction, when the A…

Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. S.S. Ahluwalia

ITA/255/2002HC Delhi14 Mar 2014
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 148

…rs in the second round. 2014:DHC:1423-DB ITA 255/2002 + connected Page 33 of 61 39. A Division Bench of Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. BharatkumarModi (2000) 246 ITR 693, referred to the well settled principle of law; setting out the difference between lack of jurisdiction and irregular exercise of authority/ jurisdiction. Proceedings are a nullity when the authority taking it, has a no power to have seisin over the case. But an order is not a nullity or in exercise of void abintio jurisdiction, when the A…

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited, (Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/8/2005HC Telangana05 Jul 2012
Section 143(1)(a)

…n to the decision rendered by the High Court of Bombay in the matter of Bharatkumar Modi (supra) to submit that when the proper 2 (1959) 37 ITR 151 (SC) 3 (2001) 165 CTR (All) 565 = (2000) 246 ITR 560 (All) 4 (2000) 164 CTR (Bom) 273 = (2000) 246 ITR 693 (Bom) = (2000) 113 TAXMAN 386 (Bom) 12 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters opportunity of hearing has been given to the assessee the entire annulment of assessment cannot be justified and even if certain wrong is committed the entirety of the assessment order cannot be said to be annulled. Therefore, the question of law is required to…

Commissioner of Income Tax v. BharatkumarModi (246 ITR 693) — Cited in 10 Judgments | BharatTax