How many judgments cite GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO?

1,296 judgments on BharatTax cite GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO (259 ITR 19), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3), Section 142(1), Section 68, Section 151.

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO

259 ITR 19Supreme Court of India2003#30 most cited

What is GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

1,296

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

GKN Driveshafts v. ITO · Section 148 notice procedure · reasons for reopening assessment · objections to reassessment notice · speaking order on objections · Income Tax Act Section 147 · reassessment proceedings · assessee's rights Section 148 · 259 ITR 19 · disposal of objections

Also reported as

125 Taxmann 963

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 142(1)Section 68 Section 151 Section 250 Section 143(2)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

live link kelvinator borrowed satisfaction mere change of opinion escapement of income reason to believe tangible material change of opinion reopening of assessment income escaping assessment reassessment proceedings notice under section 148

Judgments citing GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO

M. ABBAS & CO.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 24(2), MUMBAI

ITA 1224/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Justice (Retd.) C V Bhadang& Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Josshi, AdvFor Respondent: Assessee by

Section 133ASection 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 28Section 69C

…आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण"ायपीठमुंबईम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE JUSTICE (RETD.) C V BHADANG, PRESIDENT& SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM I.T.A. No.1224/Mum/2015 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/s. M. Abbas & CO. ACIT 24(2), Mumbai ½, Majid Ali Mansion, Bharda Wadi, Andheri (W), Mumbai- Vs. 400058 PAN: AANFM4548C Assessee- अपीलाथ" / Appellant Revenue -""थ"/ Respondent : Assessee by : Shri Vipul Josshi, Adv. Revenue by : Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. AR. : 22.01.2026 Date of Hearing : 21.04.2026 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, AM: The captioned appeal is preferred by the a…

SNEHALATHA SINGHI ,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1175/BANG/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri K R Pradeep, Advocate &

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 68Section 69C

…osed the material facts fully and truly necessary for assessment and there is no new or fresh information or evidence warranting reopening of the assessment. 8. That the entire reassessment proceedings violates the procedure prescribed by the Supreme Court in 259 ITR 19 for 148 proceedings. 9. The reassessment proceedings is on a change of opinion on the same set of facts without there being any new evidence or information which is not permitted under law. 10. The reasons / findings of the Authorities below are unsustainable and untenable in law as there is no relationship to the facts emerging from the record. 1…

PRAGNESH AMRUTLAL GAJJAR,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2207/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Vihar Soni, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr. D.R

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 19Section 2Section 80CSection 80D

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD Before Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2019-20 Pragnesh Amrutlal The Income Tax Gajjar, 17, Officer, Vasisthnagar Society, Vs Ward-5(3)(2), Isanpur Rod, Ghodasar, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad (Respondent) PAN: AHDPG6551A (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Vihar Soni, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Umesh Kumar Agrawal, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 28-01-2026 Date of pronouncement : 10-04-2026 आदेश/ORDER This is an appeal filed against the order dated 10-11- 2025 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for assessment year 201…

ACIT, CIRCLE-19(1), NEW DELHI vs. OXY HOMEZ PROMOTERS PVT LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7246/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. M Balaganesh & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Acit, Circle-19(1), Vs. Oxy Homez Promoters Pvt. C.R. Building, I.P. Estate, Ltd. 117, Shreshtha Vihar New Delhi New Delhi 110092 Pan No. Aakcs6020P (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 68

…doing so the Ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the binding ratio of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Home Finders Housing Ltd. vs. ITO [2018] 404 ITR 611 (SC) which held that non-compliance with the procedure prescribed in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [(2003) 259 ITR 19 SC does not render the reassessment order void ab initio, but is a curable defect rectifiable by remitting the matter to the Assessing Officer. 2. The appellant craves to be allowed to add any fresh ground(s) of appeal and or deleted or amend any of the ground(s) of appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of incom…

LASCO CHEMIE PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-15(2), NEW DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 3811/DEL/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarlasco Chemie Private Vs. Income Tax Officer, Limited, Ward-15(2), Delhi 10489 Kalptaru, Sadar Thana Road Motia Khan, New Delhi 110055 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aabcl 3502 E Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 151Section 250

…ort which formed the sole basis of reopening is also not provided to the appellant. 36. Not providing the actual reason recorded and the material forming the basis of so-called reasons vitiates the entire reassessment (refer GKN Driveshafts (India) Pvt. Ltd. 259 ITR 19 (SC), Sabh Infrastructure Ltd v ACIT (2017) 398 ITR 198 (Del)- Revenue’s SLP dismissed. Re (g): Legal objections filed were disposed of cryptically 37. It is submitted that the disposal of legal objections vide orders dated 19.08.2019 and 02.09.2019 was merely an idle formality. It is respectfully submitted that a speaking order is an order that…

ANSHOYABEN BHAGVANJIBHAI BHOJANI,MORBI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, MORBI, MORBI

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

ITA 13/RJT/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 13/Rjt/2026 ("नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: (2017-18) Anshoyaben Bhagvanjibhai Bhojani, Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Morbi Shreeji Nagar, B/H. Chhatralaya Road, Vs. Income Tax Office, Aayakar Vibhag, B/H New Bus Stand, Morbi, J.K. Chamber, National Highway-8-A, Gujarat 363641 At- Lalpar, Morbi Gujarat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Brnpb6281R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Hardik Vora, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR

Section 115BSection 143Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 234ASection 250Section 271ASection 68

…ection 147 to 151 including the insertion provision of section 148A providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of GKN Driveshafts India Ltd. v. ITO reported in [2002] 125 Taxman 963/259 ITR 19 (SC). 3) The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) has come to the conclusion that notices issued under TOLA under provision of section 148 of old regime would be an invalid notice and therefore, by exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, and in order to save 90,0000 such notices issued by the Revenu…

BIMAL DILIP SAMANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 24(1)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, ground No. 4 of the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4889/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Arun Khodpia(Physical Hearing)

Section 147Section 254(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (Physical hearing) Bimal Dilip Samani, ITO, Ward – 24(1)(3), Mumbai, Flat No. 9, Building No. 4, Juhu Vs Kautilya Bhavan, Sameep CHSL, Juhu Versova Link Bandra Kurla Complex, Road, Andheri (W), Mumbai, Mumbai – 400051. Maharashtra - 400053. [PAN : AOWPS6566B] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee by Ms. Dinkle Haria, Advocate Revenue by Shri Leyaqat Ali Aafaqui, Sr. DR Date of Institution 23.09.2024 Date of hearing 14.01.2026 Date of pronouncement 06.04.2026 Orde…

ARUN KUMAR MAURYA,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-2(1), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 415/LKW/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 50CSection 56Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

…I.T.A. No.415/LKW/2023 Assessment Year:2014-15 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.415/LKW/2023 Assessment year:2014-15 Arun Kumar Maurya Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income B-1/5, L-Park Mahanagar, Tax/ITO-2(1) Lucknow-226001. NFAC, New Delhi. PAN:ADZPM2830N (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent by Shri R. K. Agarwal, CIT (D.R.) O R D E R (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.415/LKW/2023 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 against impug…

ARIMILLI RAMA KRISHNA,WEST GODAVARI DIST vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

ITA 639/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 194CSection 194JSection 2(22)(e)Section 263

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, िवशाखापटणम पीठ, िवशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM “DIVISION” BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM "ी रवीश सूद ,"ाियक सद" एवं "ी ओंकारे"र िचदारा लेखा सद" के सम", BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.639/VIZ/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year:2014-15) Vs. ACIT, Circle – 1 Arimilli Rama Krishna D.No. 20-175 Income Tax Office Beside AVR & CO. Rice Mill Aayakar Bhavan Velpur, West Godavari District-534222 Veerabhadrapuram Andhra Pradesh Rajahmundry-533105 Andhra Pradesh [PAN: ACAPA9477D] करदाता का…

GRANULES INDIA LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1289/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Mar 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha G. Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं / Ita No.1289/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) Granules India Limited Vs. Dcit- Circle -2(1) 15Th Floor, Granules Tower Signature Tower, Botanical Garden Road Sy. No. 6(P) Of Kondaput Kondapur, Hyderabad – 500084 Sy. No. 37 Of Kothaguda Telangana Opp. Botanical Gardens Serilingampalluy, R.R. District Pan: Aaacg7369K Hyderabad-500084, Telangana (अपीलाथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent)

Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 148Section 154Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय न्यायाधिकरण में, हैदराबाद ‘बी’ बेंच, हैदराबाद IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD “B” BENCH, HYDERABAD श्री विजय पाल राि, माननीय उपाध्यक्ष एवं श्री मंजुनाथा जी, माननीय लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANJUNATHA G. HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं / ITA No.1289/HYD/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2010-11) Granules India Limited Vs. DCIT- Circle -2(1) 15th Floor, Granules Tower Signature Tower, Botanical Garden Road SY. No. 6(P) of Kondaput Kondapur, Hyderabad – 500084 SY. NO. 37 of Kothaguda Telangana Opp. Botanical Gardens Serilingamp…

NISHA DUDHERIA,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(3), BENGALURU

In the result the ground No

ITA 316/BANG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Vice – & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2015-16 Ms. Nisha Dudheria, 66, Navniketan, The Income Tax Officer, Kr Road, Basavanagudi, Ward-5(2)(3), Vs. Bangalore – 560 004. Bangalore. Pan: Bkrpd5938G Appellant Respondent Shri K.R. Pradeep, Advocate & Assessee By : Ms. Girija G.P., Advocate : Shri Subramanian – Jcit Dr Revenue By Date Of Hearing : 09-02-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 12-03-2026

For Appellant: Ms. Girija G.P., Advocate

Section 142Section 143Section 148Section 68

…2 of 8 2. The Assessee has preferred Appeal against the Appellate Order wherein the Assessee challenges the reopening of the assessment in violation of the principles of the natural justice as well as the principles enunciated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 259 ITR 19. The Assessee has also challenged several aspects of the reopening of the Assessment as well as the addition on the merits of the case. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case shows that Assessee is an individual earning salary and income from business, filed return of income on 31.08.2015 atRs. 19,91,870/-. The return of income was processed u/s…

INFINITY INTERNATIONAL,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI PRESENT JURIS. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 518/AHD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalinfinity International, Nfac, Delhi Vs. H-611, Titanium City Centre, Present Jurisdiction 100 Ft. Anandnagar Road, Ito, Ward 3(3)(1), Satellite, Ahmedabad-380015 Ahmedabad [Pan: Aaefi 2610 J] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Ms. Ukti Shah, Ar Respondent By: Shri Alpesh Parmar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2026 O R D E R Per Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-:-

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153(3)Section 250Section 68

…itiated by Your Goodself is not justified at all in the eye of law. Hence, the reassessment proceedings may kindly be dropped in the larger interest of justice. 6. In view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of GKN DRIVE SHAFT (INDIA) LTD. vs. ITO (259 ITR 19), we request Your Goodself to pass a speaking order dealing with all the objections raised hereinabove against the reasons recorded for Infinity International Vs. ITO Asst. Year : 2016-17 - 13– reopening in our case for the year under consideration prior to the issue of notice under section 148 of the Act. 7. We further invite your kind attentio…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, PAREL vs. N K FAMILY TRUST, LOWER PAREL

Accordingly, all the grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 8969/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: us, at the outset, invited our attention to the Cross Objection raised by the Assessee whereby the Assessee has challenged the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer under Section 148 of the Act which reads as under: "1. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that the reopening of

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Aditya Rai

Section 143(3)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 147Section 148

…tion of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer under Section 147/148 of the Act was bad in law. In this regard, the Learned Authorized Representative appeared before us placing reliance on the following judgments: 1. GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. Vs. ITO (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) 2. Kesar Terminals and Infrastructure Limited Vs. DCIT [2025] 171 taxmann.com 800 (Bombay). 3. Fomento Resorts & Hotels Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income, Central Circle, Panjim, Goa : Tax Appeal No. 63 of 2007, dated 30/08/2019 C.O. No.32/Mum/2026 Assessment Year 2012-2013 4. Soham Estates Vs. DCIT [ITA No.690/Mum/2023, dated 20/09…

M/S. NOVA HOME APPLIANCES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical

ITA 8329/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S. Nova Home Appliances Private Income Tax Officer 4(3)(1), Limited, Mumbai Office No.8, Second Floor Ashoka Shopping Center, Vs. G T Hospital Complex, Lt Marg, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aadcn0493N (Appellant) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Saboo, CAFor Respondent: Shri Swapnil Choudhari, Sr. AR

Section 133Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68Section 69

…e has not requested for furnishing the copy during the assessment proceeding and that the decisions relied upon by the Ld. AR have not dealt with the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. Income Tax Officer (2003) 259 ITR 19 (SC) which has laid down the proposition in case of reassessment. On the merits of the case, the Ld. DR contended that there has been a circular transaction in the case of the creditors and further the creditor has not responded to notice issued u/s 133(6) of the Act. The assessee has failed to establish the primary onus casted upon it includin…

ROHITKUMAR CHINUBHAI MODI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIR. 5(2) NOW DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1961/AHD/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Satish Solanki, ARFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

…ciate the fact that AO proceeded to complete the assessment without providing a copy of the reasons recorded for reopening the assessment to the assessee. This was mandatory as directed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of GKN Driveshaft (I) Ltd vs ITO 259 ITR 19(SC). 3. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by not appreciating the fact that the assessee's case was subjected to detailed scrutiny twice. Once u/s. 143(3) on 14-9-2011 and u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 on 17-12-2014, and there was no failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment as pr…

SAURABHBHAI ROHITBHAI MODI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIR. 5(2) NOW DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is hereby dismissed

ITA 1960/AHD/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Satish Solanki, ARFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

AMAN GUPTA,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, LTU CHENNAI, CHENNAI

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

ITA 2565/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2565/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Aman Gupta, The Deputy Commissioner A-1, Vrindavan Enclave, Vs. Of Income Tax, 189, Lloyds Road, Circle 1, Gopalapuram, Ltu, Chennai – 600 086. Chennai. Pan: Adzpa 0417D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri V. Tharish, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri V. Tharish, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam

Section 147ASection 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

…fully participating in the reassessment proceedings for over three years without raising any such grievance. 6. This is in direct contravention of the procedure mandatorily laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC), which clearly holds: "When a notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act is issued, the proper course of action for the noticee is to file return and if he so desires, to seek reasons for issuing notices. The Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons within a reasonable time. On receipt of reasons, the noticee is entitled to file obj…

SPICE OF LIFE HOTELS AND ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7704/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beeba Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Joshi &For Respondent: Assessee by

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

…e already on record during the original assessment. It was the submission that the re-assessment was also bad-in-law as the procedure required in terms of principle laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. vs. ITO [2003] 259 ITR 19 (SC) are not followed by the Ld. AO and further on account of re-examining of same facts for different facet of the issue would be impermissible in terms of judgments of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of QX KPO Services (P.) Ltd. (supra) and Demuric Holdings (P.) Ltd. (supra). 9. In backdrop of aforesaid submissions, it was the prayer tha…

SPICE OF LIFE HOTELS AND ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT- 2(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 7703/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Beeba Pillai, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Chaitanya Joshi &For Respondent: Assessee by

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 271(1)(C)Section 271(1)(c)

JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD 2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

ITA 521/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &

Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

…ection 147 to 151 including the insertion provision of section 148A providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners in consonance with the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of GKN Driveshafts India Ltd. v. ITO reported in [2002] 125 Taxman 963/259 ITR 19 (SC). ITA Nos.519 & 521/Rjt/2025 (AY 13-14 & 14-15) Jivanbhai D Sarla 3) The Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Ashish Agarwal (supra) has come to the conclusion that notices issued under TOLA under provision of section 148 of old regime would be an invalid notice and therefore, by exercise of jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of Indi…

Showing 1–20 of 1,296 · Page 1 of 65

...