How many judgments cite Madan Lai Agrawal v. CIT?

10 judgments on BharatTax cite Madan Lai Agrawal v. CIT (144 ITR 745), spanning 2015 to 2024.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Madan Lai Agrawal v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 131, Section 142(1), Section 143(2), Section 143(3), Section 147, Section 147(a).

Madan Lai Agrawal v. CIT

144 ITR 745High Court1983#10171 most cited

What is Madan Lai Agrawal v. CIT authority for?

A notice issued under section 147 or 148 is bad in law if it is issued to a person who is not the principal officer of the company or if the Assessing Officer has not applied their mind to the facts and reasons before seeking approval under section 151.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Madan Lai Agrawal v. CIT · 144 ITR 745 · section 147 · section 148 · section 151 · principal officer · non-application of mind · invalid notice · reassessment proceedings · notice bad in law

Sections most often in play

Section 131 Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147 Section 147(a)Section 147(b)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 147(b)section 147(a)bogus share capital sanctioning authority section 151(1)principal officer section 292bb non application of mind material facts necessary for assessment section 153c(1)section 292b section 292

Judgments citing Madan Lai Agrawal v. CIT

Amit Khatri, Sonipat vs. ITO, Ward 1, Sonipat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 2430/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2430/Del/2023 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 बनाम Amit Khatri Income Tax Officer Ward No.30, Garhi Bhraman, Vs. Ward-1, Sonipat, Haryana. Sonipat, Haryana. Pan No. Bdspk3438G अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 151

…notice bad in law as per the ratio of the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Rama Devi Agrawal Vs. CIT reported at 117 ITR 256 [Calcutta] and the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Madan Lai Agrawal Vs. CIT reported at 144 ITR 745 [All]. On similar facts, mentioned in the reason recorded, the Hon'ble ITAT in Shree Balkishan Aggarwal Glass Industries P Ltd in ITA No.l523/Del/2014 in para 22 at page 18 has quashed the reassessment proceeding” I.T.A. No. 2430/Del/2023 4. Briefly reiterating the written submissions of the assessee, the ld. AR submitted that the invocation of…

Sky Blue Infotech Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO Ward - 23(4), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as

ITA 438/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasadआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.438/Del/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 बनाम Sky Blue Infotech Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax Officer 206, Hans Bhawan, 1, Vs. Ward-23(4), Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, Room No.246, C.R. Bldg., New Delhi. I.P. Estate, New Delhi. Pan No. Aalcs1584K अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69C

…notice bad in law as per the ratio of the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Rama Devi Agrawal Vs. CIT reported at 117 ITR 256 [Calcutta] and the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Madan Lai Agrawal Vs. CIT reported at 144 ITR 745 [All]. On similar facts, mentioned in the reason recorded, the Hon'ble ITAT in Shree Balkishan Aggarwal Glass Industries P Ltd in ITA No.l523/Del/2014 in para 22 at page 18 has quashed the reassessment proceeding” 4. Briefly reiterating the written submissions of the assessee, the ld. AR submitted that the invocation of reassessment proceedings b…

Smt. Varshaben Paras Jani(L.H. of Shri Paras Chunilal Jani), Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, Circle-5(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 536/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 536/Ahd/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13)

For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT. DR

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292B

…the decisions of Y Narayana Chetty v. ITO, 35 ITR 388 (SC); CIT v. Thayaballi Mulla Jeevaji Kapasi , 66 ITR 147 (SC); CIT v. Kurban Hussain Ibrahimji Mithiborwala, 82 ITR 821 (SC); Nayalchand Malukchand Dagli v. CIT, 62 ITR 102 (Guj); Madanlal Agarwal v. CIT, 144 ITR 745 (All); PN Sasikumar v. CIT, 170 ITR 80 (Ker); and Electro Steel Castings Ltd. 264 ITR 410 (Cal)-SLP Dismissed 266 ITR (St.) 104 (SC). The existence of a valid section 148 notice being a condition precedent for the exercise of the jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer to assess or reassess under Section 147, it does not confer any right to the ass…

Shyam Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4908/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Sr. D. R

Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 68Section 69C

…I.T.A. No. 4908/Del/2018 AND I.T.A. No. 4907/Del/2018 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL [ DELHI BENCH “S.M.C.” NEW DELHI ] BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER, S.M.C. आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4908/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2007-08 Shyam Products Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, बनाम 206 – Hans Bhawan, Ward : 23 (3) Vs. 1, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 001. PAN : AADCS0943E A N D आ.अ.सं./ I.T.A No.4907/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2008-09 Optimist Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, बनाम 206 – Hans Bhawan, Ward : 19 (2) Vs. 1, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, N…

Optimist Electronics P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-19(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4907/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Sr. D. R

Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 68Section 69C

ACIT, Circle- 23(1), New Delhi vs. Shree Balkishan Agarwal Glass Industries Ltd., Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 5821/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2022AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Jeetender Chand, Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

…notice bad in law as per the ratio of the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Rama Devi Agrawal Vs. CIT reported at 117 ITR 256 [Calcutta] and the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Madan Lai Agrawal Vs. CIT reported at 144 ITR 745 [All]. In the respondent assessee own case for AY 2003-04, the Hon’ble ITAT in ITA No.l523/Del/2014 in para 22 at page 18 has quashed the assessment proceeding on account of invalid notice. 4. Recording of reason after taking approval u/s 151 of IT Act: In para 14 of reason recorded (PB 9), there is mention of approval u/s 151 of the Act already…

M/S.M.L.Realty, Mumbai vs. ACIT 22(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 795/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri G. Manjunatha, Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S M. L. Realty, Acit-22(2), Mumbai 411/A Sunder Villa, S. V. बनाम/ Road, Santacruz (W), Vs. Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.Aaqfm3360H

Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)Section 148(2)Section 292BSection 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ, ‘डी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI "ी संद"प गोसाई , "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथ, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri SANDEEP GOSAIN, Judicial Member AND Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member, Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s M. L. Realty, ACIT-22(2), Mumbai 411/A Sunder Villa, S. V. बनाम/ Road, Santacruz (W), Vs. Mumbai ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No.AAQFM3360H "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Keshav B. Bhujle Shri D.G. Pansari राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by 02/05/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date of Hearing : 17/05/2019 आदेश क" तार"…

Narendra M. Ruia, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 10(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 252/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ravish Soodmr. Narendra M. Ruia Income Tax Officer-10(3)(1) Plot No. 123, Street No. 17, Aayakar Bhavan, New Marin Lines Vs. Midc, Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 093 Pan – Aabpr3674C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri D.M. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abdul Hakeem M., D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(22)(e)

…P a g e | 1 ITA No. 252/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2007-08 Mr. Narendra M. Ruia Vs. Income Tax Officer-10(3)(1) IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "J" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri G.S.Pannu, Vice President and Shri Ravish Sood, Judicial Member Mr. Narendra M. Ruia Income Tax Officer-10(3)(1) Plot No. 123, Street No. 17, Aayakar Bhavan, New Marin Lines Vs. MIDC, Marol, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 093 PAN – AABPR3674C Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri D.M. Shah, A.R Respondent by: Shri Abdul Hakeem M., D.R Date of Hearing: 30.08.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 31.10.2018 O R D E R Per Ravish Sood, JM The present…

Vidyavihar Containers Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 10(2), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 7469/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Dec 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosain M/S. Vidyavihar Containers Ltd. Dcit, Circle-10(2) Bajaj Bhawn, 3Rd Floor, Jumnalal Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. Bajar Marg, 226, Nariman Point Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aaacn0291R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri J.D. MistriFor Respondent: Shri Ms. S. Padmaja

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…could not be called a ‘technical objection’ or a mere irregularity; such vital infirmity could not be cured or obliterated by placing reliance on s. 292B. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of Madan Lal Agarwal vs. CIT (1983) 32 CTR (All) 179 : (1983) 144 ITR 745 (All) has held that a notice contemplated by s. 148 is a jurisdictional notice for initiating proceedings for making an assessment under s. 147 and any defect in that notice cannot be cured by anything done by the ITO subsequently. A vague notice is an invalid notice and in such a case vagueness cannot be removed by reference to the other documen…

Sh. Ravinder Joon, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6852/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita Nos. 6852/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ravinder Joon, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/O Shri Rajender Singh, H.No.46 Ward-1(2), Gali No. B/10, Ashok Vihar, Gurgaon Phase-Iii, Gurgaon (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ajepj1394F Assessee By : Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Adv. & Sh. Shailesh Gupta, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 04.12.2015 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Adv. & Sh. Shailesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(2)(ii)Section 143(3)Section 292B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM And Smt. Beena Pillai, JM ITA Nos. 6852/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ravinder Joon, Vs Income Tax Officer, S/o Shri Rajender Singh, H.No.46 Ward-1(2), Gali No. B/10, Ashok Vihar, Gurgaon Phase-III, Gurgaon (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AJEPJ1394F Assessee by : Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Adv. & Sh. Shailesh Gupta, CA Revenue by : Sh. Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 02.12.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 04.12.2015 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order dated 27.11.2014 of…