Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited

356 ITR 562High Court2013#8050 most cited
14

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 132Section 127Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151

Issues it is cited on

section 5(8)section 119(2)(a)principal director general of income-taxclosely held companyaccumulated profitssection 292bsection 119(2)specified authoritysection 260section 292section 260asection 119

Judgments citing Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, COIMBATORE, COIMBATORE vs. SRI MAHESWARY GRANITES (P) LTD, COIMBATORE

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

ITA 3054/CHNY/2025[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Feb 2026

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3054/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2015-16 The Asst. Commissioner Of Sri Maheswary Granites (P) Income Tax, Vs. Ltd., Central Circle – 2, Old No.115, New No.84, Coimbatore Bashyakarlu Road West, R.S.Puram, Coimbatore Pan: Aafcs 9118K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. V. Aswathy, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri K.M.C.R. Mohan, Advocate सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20.02.2026

For Appellant: Ms. V. Aswathy, JCITFor Respondent: Shri K.M.C.R. Mohan, Advocate
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 274

…Section 292B was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. The object and purpose of introducing the said section as explained in Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under. - 29. Object and purpose behind Section 292-B is to ensure that technical pleas on the ground of mistake, defect or omission should not invalidate the assessment proceedings. The primary requirement :- 12 -: is to go into and examine the question of whether any prejudice or confusion was caused to the assessee. If no prejudice…

LOVELY PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

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

ITA 770/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) a
Section 127Section 127(1)Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153C

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 770/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 Lovely Promoters Private ACIT, Limited Central Circle, Vs. 47A 47A, 3rd Floor Zakaria Ajmer. Street, Kolkata-700073. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCL1338C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mayank Taparia (Adv.) jktLo…

CUMMINS TECHNOLOGIES INDIA (P) LTD.,DEWAS vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1(1), UJJAIN

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 982/IND/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanicommins Technologies India Acit, Circle -1(1) Private Limited Ujjain Vs. Industrial Area No.2, A.B. Road, M.P. (Appellant / Assessee) (Revenue) Pan: Aabct2018B Assessee By Shri Ketan Ved & Pinkesh Vakharia Ars Revenue By Ms. Simran Bhullar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 29.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 30.11.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)

…s case is a mistake or at best, a defect and/or an omission, which ought not to invalidate the assessment proceedings. 10.2 In support of this plea, Mr Rai has referred to the judgment of the coordinate bench in CIT v. Jagat Novel Executives Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 356 ITR 562. 11. Mr Ajay Vohra, learned senior counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, contends to the contrary. It is his contention that the 2019 Circular is binding on the revenue. 11.1 Mr Vohra also submits that the error is jurisdictional in nature and therefore, cannot be corrected by taking recourse to Section 292B of the Act. 11.2 I…

JAMMAT-E-ISLAMI HIND,NEW DELHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1289/DEL/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2023

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: Na Jammat-E-Islami Hind, Vs Cit (Exemptions), D-321, Dawat Nagar, New Delhi. Abul Fazal Enclave, Jamia Nagar, New Delhi – 110 025. Pan: Aaatj3324L (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. & Shri Somil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Waseem Arshad, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2023

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT, DR
Section 12ASection 148Section 292B

…see has been duly served and had participated in the proceedings.” 5.1 The ld. DR further relied on the provisions of section 292B of the Act and the judgement of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case CIT vs. M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Ltd. (2013) 356 ITR 562 to contend that the object 3 Jammat-E-Islami Hind vs. CIT(E) and purpose behind having section 292B is to ensure that technical pleas on the ground of mistake, defect or omission should not invalidate the assessment proceedings when no prejudice is caused due to non-observance of technical formalities. He submitted that the judgement relied on b…

INDER CHAND BAJAJ,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-32, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2872/DEL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2015-16 Inder Chand Bajaj (Huf), Vs Dcit, Ae-17, 2Nd Floor, Central Circle-32, Tagore Garden, Delhi. Delhi – 110 027. Pan: Aaahb6564N (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv. & Ms Uma Upadhyay, Ca Revenue By : Shri Waseem Arshad, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2023

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT, DR
Section 12ASection 148Section 153CSection 292B

…see has been duly served and had participated in the proceedings.” 6.1 The ld. DR further relied on the provisions of section 292B of the Act and the judgement of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case CIT vs. M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Ltd. (2013) 356 ITR 562 to contend that the object and purpose behind having section 292B is to ensure that technical pleas on the ground of mistake, defect or omission should not invalidate the assessment proceedings when no prejudice is caused due to non-observance of technical formalities. He submitted that the judgement relied on by the ld. AR in the case of Brandix…

SHRI MAYUR BANSAL,GWALIOR vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL, BHOPAL

In the result, appeals of the revenue in IT(SS)ANo

ITA 81/IND/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 Aug 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 119Section 153ASection 156

…date the assessment proceedings. Page 15 of 23 IT(SS)A No.181/Ind/2020 & others Mayur and Yogesh Bansal Page 16 of 23 10.2 In support of this plea, Mr Rai has referred to the judgment of the coordinate bench in CIT v. Jagat Novel Executives Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 356 ITR 562. 11. Mr Ajay Vohra, learned senior counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, contends to the contrary. It is his contention that the 2019 Circular is binding on the revenue. 11.1 Mr Vohra also submits that the error is jurisdictional in nature and therefore, cannot be corrected by taking recourse to Section 292B of the Act. 11.2 I…

SHRI ISHAK,INDORE vs. THE ITO 5(4), INDORE

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

ITA 13/IND/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Ishak Ito 5(4) Kasturbagram S.O. Mundla Indore Vs. Nayata, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Akxpi 6044 D Assessee By Shri Milind Wadhwani, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.08.2023

Section 144Section 147Section 154

…s case is a mistake or at best, a defect and/or an omission, which ought not to invalidate the assessment proceedings. 10.2 In support of this plea, Mr Rai has referred to the judgment of the coordinate bench in CIT v. Jagat Novel Executives Pvt. Ltd., [2013] 356 ITR 562. 11. Mr Ajay Vohra, learned senior counsel who appears on behalf of the respondent/assessee, contends to the contrary. It is his contention that the 2019 Circular is binding on the revenue. 11.1 Mr Vohra also submits that the error is jurisdictional in nature and therefore, cannot be corrected by taking recourse to Section 292B of the Act. 11.2 I…

SMT. MANJEET KAUR SRAN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the 05 appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 2643/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Ashisha Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Verma, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…Section 292B was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. The object and purpose of introducing the said section as explained in Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under:- "28. The aforesaid provision has been enacted to curtail and negate technical pleas due to any defect, mistake or omission in a notice/summons/return. 20 The provision was enacted by Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. It has a salutary purpose and ensures that technical objections, without subs…

SMT. MANJEET KAUR SRAN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the 05 appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 2640/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Ashisha Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Verma, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…Section 292B was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. The object and purpose of introducing the said section as explained in Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under:- "28. The aforesaid provision has been enacted to curtail and negate technical pleas due to any defect, mistake or omission in a notice/summons/return. 20 The provision was enacted by Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. It has a salutary purpose and ensures that technical objections, without subs…

SMT. MANJEET KAUR SRAN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the 05 appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 2639/DEL/2017[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Ashisha Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Verma, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…Section 292B was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. The object and purpose of introducing the said section as explained in Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under:- "28. The aforesaid provision has been enacted to curtail and negate technical pleas due to any defect, mistake or omission in a notice/summons/return. 20 The provision was enacted by Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. It has a salutary purpose and ensures that technical objections, without subs…

SMT. MANJEET KAUR SRAN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the 05 appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 2642/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Ashisha Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Verma, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…Section 292B was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. The object and purpose of introducing the said section as explained in Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under:- "28. The aforesaid provision has been enacted to curtail and negate technical pleas due to any defect, mistake or omission in a notice/summons/return. 20 The provision was enacted by Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. It has a salutary purpose and ensures that technical objections, without subs…

SMT. MANJEET KAUR SRAN,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the 05 appeals filed by the Assessee stand allowed

ITA 2641/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Ms. Ashisha Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Verma, Sr. DR
Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…Section 292B was introduced by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. The object and purpose of introducing the said section as explained in Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under:- "28. The aforesaid provision has been enacted to curtail and negate technical pleas due to any defect, mistake or omission in a notice/summons/return. 20 The provision was enacted by Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. It has a salutary purpose and ensures that technical objections, without subs…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S SUDEV INDUSTRIES LTD.

ITA/805/2005HC Delhi31 May 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 230A(1)Section 260ASection 282(2)

…section as explained in Commissioner of Income Tax ITA No. 805 /2005 Page 14 of 29 versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under:- “28. The aforesaid provision has been enacted to curtail and negate technical pleas due to any defect, mistake or omission in a notice/summons/return. The provision was enacted by Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. It has a salutary purpose and ensures that technical objections, wi…

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III vs. M/S SUDEV INDUSTRIES LIMITED

ITA-805/2005HC Delhi31 May 2018
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 230A(1)Section 260ASection 282(2)

…ned in Commissioner of Income Tax 2018:DHC:3632-DB ITA No. 805 /2005 Page 14 of 29 versus M/s Jagat Novel Exhibitors Private Limited, [2013] 356 ITR 562 (Del) is as under:- “28. The aforesaid provision has been enacted to curtail and negate technical pleas due to any defect, mistake or omission in a notice/summons/return. The provision was enacted by Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1975 with effect from 1st October, 1975. It has a salutary purpose and ensures that technical objections, wi…