Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. Commissioner of Income-tax

120 ITR 576High Court1979#12371 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153(2)Section 271(1)(c)Section 282(1)Section 37(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 282section 34section 292section 149section 29service of noticesection 28income-tax officernotice under section 148reassessment proceedingssection 139section 153

Judgments citing Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. Commissioner of Income-tax

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

…at notice must be served personally upon the individual or upon his agent duly authorized in terms of Order III rule 6, CPC. The contention of the assessee was upheld and the reassessment proceeding was quashed. In Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 576 (Mad), the notice was served by the notice-server of the Department on the manager of the assessee- firm. The manager wrote to the Income-tax Officer seeking time. Since no return was filed by the assessee within the time granted, the Income-tax Officer completed the reassessment under section 144 of the 1961 Act. On appeal the High Court found t…

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal stands allowed

ITA 771/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Sept 2025AY 2010-11
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

…hat notice must be served personally upon the individual or upon his agent duly authorized in terms of Order III rule 6, CPC. The contention of the assessee was upheld and the reassessment proceeding was quashed. In Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. CIT [1979] 120 ITR 576 (Mad), the notice was served by the notice-server of the Department on the manager of the assessee- firm. The manager wrote to the Income-tax Officer seeking time. Since no return was filed by the assessee within the time granted, the Income-tax Officer completed the reassessment under section 144 of the 1961 Act. On appeal the High Court found t…

BIHARI CHARITABLE TRUST,DELHI vs. ITO(E), WARD GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 3032/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Sept 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 34

…rsonally upon the individual or upon his agent duly authorized in terms of Order III Rule 6 CPC. The contention of the Assessee was upheld and the reassessment proceeding was quashed. 32. In Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. Commissioner of Income- tax (1979) 120 ITR 576 (Mad) the notice was served by the notice- server of the Department on the Manager of the Assessee-firm. The Manager wrote to the ITO seeking time. Since no return was filed by the Assessee within the time granted, the ITO completed the reassessment under Section 144 of the 1961 Act. On appeal the High Court found that none of the partners of the…

GIRIRAJKRIPA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 168/JPR/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Sept 2020AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Addl.CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 2(47)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…. ITRO 242 ITR 141 (Mad) (v) Sudev Industries Ltd. v. ITO 98 TTJ 97 (Del) (vi) Hind Book House v. ITO 92 lTD 415 (Del) (vii) Dulli Chand Laxmi Narain v. AC'IT 89 lTD 426 (Del) (viii) Dina Nath v. CIT 204 ITR 667 (J&K) (ix) Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. CIT 120 ITR 576 (Mad)" Therefore the order passed without serving notice to the assessee deserve to be quashed. 8. On the other hand, the ld DR had relied on the orders of the authorities below. CIT Dr relied on provisions of Section 292BB and contended that since assessee had participated in the reassessment proceedings and had also filed its return of income,…

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

…ved personally upon the individual or upon his agent duly authorized in terms of Order III Rule 6 CPC. The contention of the Assessee was upheld and the reassessment proceeding was quashed. In Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. Commissioner of Income-tax (1979) 120 ITR 576 (Mad) the notice was served by the notice-server of the Department on the Manager of the Assessee-firm. The Manager wrote to the ITO seeking time. Since no return was filed by the Assessee within the time granted, the ITO completed the reassessment under Section 144 of the 1961 Act. On appeal the High Court found that none of the partners of the…

ANIDHI IMPEX P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 4(1)(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 2041/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha () Anidhi Impex Pvt Ltd Vs Ito-4(1)(3), Mumbai C/O A Porwal & Associates 201, Rajshila, 597, Jss Road Near Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400 002 Pan : Aaeca7748J Appellant Respondednt

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 282Section 68

…ITR 613) 4. CIT v. Dr. Ajay Prakash All. HC (2014) (42 taxmann.com 387) 5. CIT v. Rajesh Kumar Sharma Del. HC (2007) (165 Taxman 488) 6. Addl. CIT v. Prem Kumar All. HC Rastogi (1980) (124 ITR 381) 7. Jayanthi Talkies Mad. HC Distributors v. CIT ( 1 979) (120 ITR 576) 8. Heaven Distillery (P.) Ltd. v. Mum. ITAT 1TO (2017) (185TTJ 197) 9.DCIT v. M/s. M. K. Enterprise (ITA Nos. !81and426/Kol/2013) 10. Anil Kumar Goel v. ITO (2008) (116 TTJ 239) 11.Hind Book House v. ITO (2005) (92ITD 415) 12. ITO v. Suraj Prakash (1984) (7 ITD 839) 13. CIT v. Baxiram Roadmal (1934) (2 ITR 438) Nagpur Judicial Commissioner…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-I vs. CHETAN GUPTA

The appeal is dismissed but, in the facts and circumstances of the

ITA/72/2014HC Delhi15 Sept 2015
Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…lly upon the individual or upon his agent duly authorized in terms of Order III Rule 6 CPC. The contention of the Assessee was upheld and the reassessment proceeding was quashed. 32. In Jayanthi Talkies Distributors v. Commissioner of Income-tax (1979) 120 ITR 576 (Mad) the notice was served by the notice-server of the Department on the Manager of the Assessee-firm. The Manager wrote to the ITO seeking time. Since no return was filed by the Assessee within the time granted, the ITO completed the reassessment under Section 144 of the 1961 Act. On appeal the High Court found that none 2015:DHC:7656-DB…

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

ITA/7/2006HC Delhi08 Feb 2012
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 260A

…906 (Cal.) the notice for reopening did not mention that the income was being assessed in the status of association of persons and, therefore, was treated as null and void. 39. In Jayanthi Talkies Distributors versus Commissioner of Income Tax, [1979] 120 ITR 576 (Mad.), notice was served 2012:DHC:871-DB ITA Nos. 7/2006 + connected matters Page 25 of 32 on a person who was not specifically empowered or authorized to receive notice and personal service was not affected. In the said case, best judgment assessment order was…