Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt

334 ITR 25High Court2011#2595 most cited

What is Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt authority for?

The date of issuance of a notice under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act is reckoned not from the date it was issued by the authority, but from the date it was actually delivered to the assessee.

45

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt · 334 ITR 25 · 12 Taxmann.com 198 · Section 148 notice · date of issuance · notice delivery · reassessment proceedings · Section 147 · Section 149 · validity of notice · limitation period

Also reported as

12 Taxmann.com 198

Sections most often in play

Section 148Section 147Section 144Section 144BSection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 149Section 250

Issues it is cited on

impermissible avoidance arrangementsection 245hsection 245hawarrant of authorisationsection 245csection 153(2a)section 153(c)section 90asection 202section 245dsection 144basection 142a

Judgments citing Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt

SANDHYA SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. ITO (2)(3), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 585/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2014-15 Sandhya Singh Nfac, 121, Rohit Nagar, New Delhi बनाम/ Bawadia Kala, Vs. Bhopal (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aycps9215K Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari & Ms. Priyal Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.04.2026

Section 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(b)Section 69A

…, for determining if a notice has been validly issued, the notice should be sent forth and go beyond the control of the authority issuing the same, to conclude that it has been issued. (Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt or his successors to office [2011] 334 ITR 25 (Guj)). Page 25 of 35 Sandhya Singh ITA No. 585/Ind/2025 – AY 2014-15 16.3. The provisions of section 149 of the Act of 1961, does not contain the expression "Assessing Officer". Therefore, no distinction can be made between the "Assessing Officer" and "Income Tax Business Application portal" under section 149 of the Act of 1961. The time taken…

THALLA SRISAILAM GOUD,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 589/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR and Ms. Payal Gupta, SR-DR
Section 147Section 148

…, for determining if a notice has been validly issued, the notice should be sent forth and go beyond the control of the authority issuing the same, to conclude that it has been issued. (Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt or his successors to office [2011] 334 ITR 25 (Guj)). 16.3. The provisions of section 149 of the Act of 1961, does not contain the expression "Assessing Officer". Therefore, no distinction can be made between the "Assessing Officer" and "Income Tax Business Application portal" under section 149 of the Act of 1961. The time taken by the Income Tax Business Application software for triggering o…

DESU ENTERPRISES,ONGOLE vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 549/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita Nos.549 & 589/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Years:2015-16 & 2013-14) 1. M/S. Desu Enterprises, Ongole (A.P.) Pan: Aagfd1940C 2. Thalla Srisailam Goud, Ibrahimpatnam. Pan: Αιτpg3044K (Appellants) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ongole. Income Tax Officer, Ward 9(1), Hyderabad. (Respondents) निर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessees By: राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By: Shri Sashank Dundu, Advocate Ms. U. Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr & Ms. Payal Gupta, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 06/11/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 07/01/2026 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.: These Appeals Are Filed By M/S. Desu Enterprises & Shri Thalla Srisailam Goud (“The Assessees”), Feeling Aggrieved By The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi (“Ld. Cit(A)”), Dated 26.02.2024 & 09.04.2024 For The A.Ys. 2015-16 & 2013-14 Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In These Two Appeals Are Identical, They Are Heard Together & One Consolidated Order Is Being Passed For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

For Respondent: Shri Sashank Dundu, Advocate
Section 147Section 148

…, for determining if a notice has been validly issued, the notice should be sent forth and go beyond the control of the authority issuing the same, to conclude that it has been issued. (Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt or his successors to office [2011] 334 ITR 25 (Guj)). 16.3. The provisions of section 149 of the Act of 1961, does not contain the expression "Assessing Officer". Therefore, no distinction can be made between the "Assessing Officer" and "Income Tax Business Application portal" under section 149 of the Act of 1961. The time taken by the Income Tax Business Application software for triggering o…

CHANDANAM SANGAIH & SON,NARSARAOPETA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NARSARAOPETA

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 567/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 567/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Chandanam Sangaih & Son V. Income Tax Officer – Ward - 1 7-159/47, Innaiah Gari Building Income Tax Office, 12-9-22/A Vinukonda Road Prakashnagar, Narsaraopeta Narasaraopeta, Guntur – 522601 Guntur – 522601 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aalfc8018M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…under section 148 of the Act. In this regard, the Ld.AR placed reliance upon the Page No. 3 I.T.A. No. 567/VIZ/2025 Chandanam Sangaih & Son decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt, reported in (2011) 334 ITR 25 (Guj). Thus, the Ld.AR submitted that since the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 08.04.2021 without following the amended provisions of sections 147 to 151 of the Act w.e.f. 01.04.2021, the said notice is invalid and bad in law. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld. DR”] submitted that t…

TIRATHRAJ RAJMURAT MAURYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 505/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.501, 504 & 505/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Tirathraj Rajmurat Vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(6) Maurya Surat Plot No. 20, Opp BRC Gate, Master NI Chal, Harinagar 3, Udhana, Opp BRC, Colony, Surat PAN – ANIPM0381M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vardhman Jain, CA Revenue by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challeng…

TIRATHRAJ RAJMURAT MAURYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 504/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.501, 504 & 505/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Tirathraj Rajmurat Vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(6) Maurya Surat Plot No. 20, Opp BRC Gate, Master NI Chal, Harinagar 3, Udhana, Opp BRC, Colony, Surat PAN – ANIPM0381M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vardhman Jain, CA Revenue by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challeng…

TIRATHRAJ RAJMURAT MAURYA,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(6), SURAT

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 501/SRT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Om Prakash Kant

Section 142(1)Section 142BSection 147Section 151ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “DB” BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No.501, 504 & 505/SRT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Tirathraj Rajmurat Vs ITO, Ward 1(2)(6) Maurya Surat Plot No. 20, Opp BRC Gate, Master NI Chal, Harinagar 3, Udhana, Opp BRC, Colony, Surat PAN – ANIPM0381M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Vardhman Jain, CA Revenue by Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09.10.2025 Date of Pronouncement 26.11.2025 ORDER Per: SHRI. SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.: The present appeals have been filed by the assessee challeng…

SYLVAN GREENS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 414/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Bhala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gorav Avasthi, JCIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 801C

…7 shall apply as they apply for the purposes of that section.] (2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151. In Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatť [2011] 12 taxmann.com 198/202 Taxman 99/334 ITR 25 (Guj.), it was held by the Gujarat High Court that "date of 16 ITA NO.414.JPR/2025 SYLVAN GREEN PRIVATE LTD VS DCIT,CIRCLE-6 , JAIPUR issuance of notice under section 148 Income-tax Act has to be reckoned not from the date when it was issued, but on the date when it was actually delivered on the assessee". The relevant paragraphs of the same are…

ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA, SURGUJA,SURGUJA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMBIKAPUR, AMBIKAPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 13/RPR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur09 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.13/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Ashok Kumar Gupta Dindo H No.37 Bajar Para, Saiwahi District: Surguja-437 220 (C.G) Pan: Bbopg3824N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Surguja (C.G) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel, Sr. DR
Section 148Section 151

…s therefore bad in law and all the subsequent proceedings resultantly becomes non-est in the eyes of law. The Ld. Counsel in support of his aforesaid contention relied on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) Vs. Hiren Bhatt (2011) 334 ITR 25 (Guj.) (ii) ACIT-15(3)(2), Mumbai Vs. Surya Ferrous Alloys Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.1406/Mum/2024, CO No.77/Mum/2024, dated 24.12.2024 (iii) Income Tax Officer, Ward-14(4), New Delhi Vs. Kuber Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd. ITA Nos.6628 & 6629/Del/2014 5. In this regard, the Bench had requested the Ld. Sr. DR to obtain a report from the concerned A.O and she had…

KUMAR RAMESH SAHU,RAJKOT, GUJARAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2), RAJKOT, RAJKOT, GUJARAT

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

ITA 336/RJT/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot04 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.336/Rjt/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Kumar Ramesh Sahu बनाम/ The Acit, Sundaram, 72/3, New Cirtcle-2(3) Vs. College Wadi Rajkot – 60 001 150Ft5. Ring Road Opp. Meera Apartment Rajkot – 360 005 (Gujarat) "ायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aesps 5531 C (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) .. Assessee By : Shri M.N. Manvar, Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 13/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 04/04/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dinesh Mohan Sinha:

For Appellant: Shri M.N. Manvar, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 54Section 68

…n in the block assessment proceedings if the AO desired to complete such assessment under s. 143(3) of the Act. (c) In case of Kanubhai M. Patel (HUF) vs. Hiren Bhatt or His Successors to Office & Ors. (2010) 43 DTR (Guj) 329: (2011) 237 CTR (Guj) 544: (2011) 334 ITR 25 (Guj), wherein a Division Bench of this Court had the occasion to interpret the term "to issue" the notice in context of the provisions contained under ss. 147, 148 and 149 of the Act. (3) The third contention of the counsel was that the reasons recorded by the AO were not germane. Such reasons only recorded that the AO wanted to verify certain cl…

TIJARIA POLYPIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRLCE 4, JAIPUR

ITA 616/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…{ "clean_text": "आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण, जयपुरन्यायपीठ, जयपुर\nIN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,\nJAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR\nश्रीराठौड़ कमलेशजयन्तभाई, लेखा सदस्य एव श्रीनरेन्द्रकुमार, न्यायिकसदस्य के समक्ष\nBEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM\nआयकरअपीलसं. / ITA No. 616/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2013-14\nTijariaPolypipes Ltd.\nSP-1-2316, Ramchandrapura, RIICO Vs. The DCIT\nIndustrial Area, Sitapura, Jaipur- 302 022\nCircle-4\nJaipur\nस्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCT 4796 M\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeb…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, MADURAI vs. J S NIHAR BANU, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 445/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

…acts of the appeal before us in the instant case. ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 26 -: 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word ‘issue’ , it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. APPU TRADERS, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 442/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

…acts of the appeal before us in the instant case. ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 26 -: 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word ‘issue’ , it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. APPU TRADERS, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 441/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

…acts of the appeal before us in the instant case. ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 26 -: 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word ‘issue’ , it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. APPU TRADERS, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 364/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

…acts of the appeal before us in the instant case. ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 26 -: 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word ‘issue’ , it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. J S NIHAR BANU, PALAKKAD

ITA 363/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

…period would be squarely applicable to the facts of the appeal before us in the instant case. 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word 'issue', it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, MADURAI vs. M SHAHJAHAN, PALAKKAD

ITA 362/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

…period would be squarely applicable to the facts of the appeal before us in the instant case. 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word 'issue', it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, MADURAI vs. M SHAHJAHAN, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 360/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

…acts of the appeal before us in the instant case. ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 26 -: 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word ‘issue’ , it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIR-2, MADURAI vs. M SHAHJAHAN, PALAKKAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in I

ITA 359/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S.Achu Traders, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, No. 11/1288, Madurai M.Pudur Main Road, Vs. Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 [Pan: Aapfa8131B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.359, 360, 361 & 362 /Chny/2019 धििाारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 36, 37, 38 & 39/Chny/2019 Assessment Years : 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Shri M.Shahjahan, Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Prop. M/S. Madeena Traders Madurai No.Vii/561, M.Pudur Main Road, Vs Govindapuram Post, Palakkad, Kerala-678507 (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) [Pan: Aiyps1815P]

For Appellant: D. Anand, Advocate
Section 40A(3)

…acts of the appeal before us in the instant case. ITA No.355 & 27 others/Chny/2019 :- 26 -: 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word ‘issue’ , it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MADURAI vs. ACHU TRADERS, PALAKKAD

ITA 358/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.355, 356, 357 & 358 /Chny/2019 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 & Co 32, 33, 34 & 35 /Chny/2019

Section 40A(3)

…period would be squarely applicable to the facts of the appeal before us in the instant case. 8. Similarly in the context of issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) vs Hiren Bhatt reported in 334 ITR 25 (Guj) had held that the notice u/s 148 of the Act was dated 31.3.2010 but was sent to the speed post centre for booking only on 07.04.2010. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court held that considering the definition of the word 'issue', it is apparent that merely signing the notices on 31.03.2010, cannot be equated with issuance of notice as contemplated…

Showing 1–20 of 45 · Page 1 of 3

Kanubhai M Patel (HUF) v. Hiren Bhatt (334 ITR 25) — Cited in 45 Judgments | BharatTax