SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR
The appeal stands allowed
ITA 772/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11
Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)
For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 37(1)Section 44A
…be construed to be a proper service of notice under section 148 of the Act. The security guard was not Sh. Hari Prakash Gupta vs. ITO an agent of the assessee and therefore, the reassessment proceedings were held to be bad in law. In Dina Nath v. CIT [1993] 204 ITR 667 (J&K); [1994] 72 Taxman 174 (J&K), the notice under section 143(2) of the 1961 Act was served upon one S, who was neither a member of the family of the assessee nor his duly authorized agent. However, S had been accepting the notice on behalf of the assessee and prosecuting the cases on his behalf earlier before the income-tax authorities. The Hi…