KAD Housing Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (

469 ITR 32High Court2024#7483 most cited
15

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Also reported as

168 Taxmann.com 470

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 153CSection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 153DSection 148B

Issues it is cited on

section 153(a)(1)section 148bsection 7(1)section 119(2)(a)section 149(1)(a)section 116section 153a(1)(b)section 149(1)(b)section 153(a)section 153c(1)section 164section 153a(1)(a)

Judgments citing KAD Housing Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT (

RAGHAV LEKHI,C/O B.K KAPUR AND COMPANY vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3930/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Krinwant Sahayasstt. Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Madhav Kapur, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Kumar CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 149Section 153ASection 153C

…[2025] 175 taxmann.com 391 (Delhi)/ [2025] 305 Taxman 497 (Delhi) [29.5.2025). - Synod Farms and Infra Developers P Ltd. vs. CCIT, Central Delhi [2025] 172 taxmann.com 723 (Delhi) [20.3.2025]. - Dinesh Jindal vs. ACIT [2024] 164 taxmann.com 746 (Delhi)/[2024] 469 ITR 32 (Delhi) [27.5.2024]. 4. Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have heard the rival contentions, perused and considered the records alongwith the decisions on which the ld. Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance. The assessee by way of its ground no. 2 of appeal has assailed validity of assessment order as the same is…

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

ITA 2715/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 250

…h search is conducted. Ld. CIT DR further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the judgments of the PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. reported in 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi HC) and further in the case of Sh. Dinesh Jindal v. ACIT reported in (2024) 469 ITR 32 (Delhi HC). The Ld. CIT-DR thus submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be quashed and the order of the AO be restored. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that in case of search carried out after 01.04.2021 and where any assessment is reopened u/s 148 f…

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

ITA 2713/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250

…h search is conducted. Ld. CIT DR further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the judgments of the PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. reported in 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi HC) and further in the case of Sh. Dinesh Jindal v. ACIT reported in (2024) 469 ITR 32 (Delhi HC). The Ld. CIT-DR thus submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be quashed and the order of the AO be restored. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that in case of search carried out after 01.04.2021 and where any assessment is reopened u/s 148 f…

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

ITA 2712/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 250

…h search is conducted. Ld. CIT DR further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the judgments of the PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. reported in 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi HC) and further in the case of Sh. Dinesh Jindal v. ACIT reported in (2024) 469 ITR 32 (Delhi HC). The Ld. CIT-DR thus submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be quashed and the order of the AO be restored. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that in case of search carried out after 01.04.2021 and where any assessment is reopened u/s 148 f…

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

ITA 2711/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)Section 250

…h search is conducted. Ld. CIT DR further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the judgments of the PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. reported in 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi HC) and further in the case of Sh. Dinesh Jindal v. ACIT reported in (2024) 469 ITR 32 (Delhi HC). The Ld. CIT-DR thus submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be quashed and the order of the AO be restored. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that in case of search carried out after 01.04.2021 and where any assessment is reopened u/s 148 f…

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

ITA 2709/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149(1)(b)Section 250

…h search is conducted. Ld. CIT DR further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the judgments of the PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. reported in 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi HC) and further in the case of Sh. Dinesh Jindal v. ACIT reported in (2024) 469 ITR 32 (Delhi HC). The Ld. CIT-DR thus submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be quashed and the order of the AO be restored. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that in case of search carried out after 01.04.2021 and where any assessment is reopened u/s 148 f…

PROFORM INTERIORS PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DCIT CC-20, NEW DELHI

In the result, all the appeals for Assessment Years 2013-14 to 2022-23 in ITA

ITA 2708/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalita Nos. 4153 & 4008/Del/2025 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2018-19) Dcit, Proform Interiors Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ground Floor, Jmd Regent Room No. 269A, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Plaza, Mg Road, Gurgaon, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Haryana-122001. Extn., Delhi-110055. Pan-Aahcs5999J

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…h search is conducted. Ld. CIT DR further submits that the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly applied the judgments of the PCIT Vs. Ojjus Medicare Pvt. Ltd. reported in 161 taxmann.com 160 (Delhi HC) and further in the case of Sh. Dinesh Jindal v. ACIT reported in (2024) 469 ITR 32 (Delhi HC). The Ld. CIT-DR thus submits that the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) deserves to be quashed and the order of the AO be restored. 9. On the other hand, the Ld. AR of the assessee vehemently supported the orders of the Ld. CIT(A) and submits that in case of search carried out after 01.04.2021 and where any assessment is reopened u/s 148…

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the

ITA 1259/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 | The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit Assessee By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2025

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…f the Finance Act, 2021. 6. Per contra, the Ld. AR supported the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section 149 of the Act as it stood as on 1st April 2022, which read as under:- "1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, - (a)if three years have elapsed from the end of the rele…

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the

ITA 1257/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit Assessee By : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.10.2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21.11.2025

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…f the Finance Act, 2021. 6. Per contra, the Ld. AR supported the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section 149 of the Act as it stood as on 1st April 2022, which read as under:- "1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, - (a)if three years have elapsed from the end of the rele…

DCIT CC 2 2 , CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1256/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

…red by the Hon’ble Delhi High CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32) Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisi…

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the Revenue and the

ITA 1236/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr. N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. C. Yamuna, CIT &
Section 132Section 148Section 20Section 250

…red by the Hon’ble Delhi High CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32) Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisi…

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

ITA 1234/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate : 08.10.2025 : 21.11.2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…f the Finance Act, 2021. 6. Per contra, the Ld. AR supported the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section 149 of the Act as it stood as on 1st April 2022, which read as under:- "1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, - (a)if three years have elapsed from the end of the rele…

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2),, CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the

ITA 1232/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate : 08.10.2025 : 21.11.2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…f the Finance Act, 2021. 6. Per contra, the Ld. AR supported the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section 149 of the Act as it stood as on 1st April 2022, which read as under:- "1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, - (a)if three years have elapsed from the end of the rele…

SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT.. LTD.,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), CHENNAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and the

ITA 1231/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate : 08.10.2025 : 21.11.2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…f the Finance Act, 2021. 6. Per contra, the Ld. AR supported the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section 149 of the Act as it stood as on 1st April 2022, which read as under:- "1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, - (a)if three years have elapsed from the end of the rele…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2 (2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI vs. SOUTHERN AGRIFURANE INDUSTRIES PVT LTD, CHENNAI

ITA 1163/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 1163, 1256, 1257 & 1259/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. V. M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.1231, 1232, 1234 & 1236/Chny/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष/Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S. Southern Agrifurane Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mgm Centre No.1, 9Th Cross Street, Dr. Radhakrishnan Salai, Mylapore, Chennai - 600 004. [Pan: Aagcs 9705 F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) V. The Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Chennai. (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Department By Assessee By सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : Mrs. C. Yamuna, Cit & Mr. Bipin, Cit : Mr. N. Arjun Raj, Advocate : 08.10.2025 : 21.11.2025

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250

…f the Finance Act, 2021. 6. Per contra, the Ld. AR supported the above findings of the Ld. CIT(A) by relying on the judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the cases of KAD Housing Pvt Ltd Vs DCIT (168 taxmann.com 470) and Dinesh Jindal Vs DCIT (469 ITR 32). 7. Heard both the parties. Before we proceed to examine the impugned legal issue, let us first have a look at the provisions of Section 149 of the Act as it stood as on 1st April 2022, which read as under:- "1) No notice under section 148 shall be issued for the relevant assessment year, - (a)if three years have elapsed from the end of the rele…

KAD Housing Pvt Ltd. v. DCIT ( (469 ITR 32) — Cited in 15 Judgments | BharatTax