Narayana Chetty v. ITO

35 ITR 388Supreme Court of India1959#1564 most cited

What is Narayana Chetty v. ITO authority for?

A valid and properly served notice under section 148 (or old section 34) is a mandatory and jurisdictional prerequisite for initiating reassessment proceedings; its absence or invalidity renders the entire proceedings illegal and void ab initio. The validity of service hinges on adherence to prescribed modes, not merely the recipient's acknowledgment.

73

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2010 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Y. Narayana Chetty v. ITO · 35 ITR 388 · Section 148 notice · Section 34 notice · jurisdiction for reassessment · mandatory requirement notice · service of notice validity · void ab initio proceedings · income escaping assessment · prescribed mode of service · not procedural requirement

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 144Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 151Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 282(1)section 148(1)section 282section 292bbsection 124section 120approval under section 151section 34section 292bservice of noticesection 292income escaping assessment

Judgments citing Narayana Chetty v. ITO

Sumitra Devi, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Gurgaon

ITA 2499/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B', NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. SUDHIR KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2499/Del/2025 (Asstt. Year :2013-14) SUMITRA DEVI, C/O M.R. SAHU, HOUSE NO. 651, 1ST FLOOR, SECTOR-10A, NEAR G.D. GOENKA PUBLIC SCHOOL, GURGAON-122001 HARYANA (PAN: AVPPD4710N) (Appellant) VS. ITO, WARD 4(1), GURGAON (Respondent) ASSESSEE BY : Sh. M.R. Sahu, CA Respondent by : Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement 23.02.2026 11.03.2026 ORDER PER SUDHIR KUMAR, JM: This appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 25.3.2025…

Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2569/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Natekar, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…ous decisions as under: 1. CIT vs. Shital Prasad Kharag Prasad [2006] 280 ITR 541 (All. HC) 2. Harsingar Gutkha Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2011] 336 ITR 90 (All. HC) 3. CIT Vs. Kanpur Plastipack Ltd. reported in (2017) 390 ITR 381 4. Y. Narayan Chetty vs. ITO (1959) 35 ITR 388 (SC); 5. CIT vs. Thayaballi Mulla Jeevaji Kapasi (1967) 66 ITR 147 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Kurban Hussain Ibrahimji Mithiborwala (1971) 82 ITR 821 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. (296 ITR 0333) 8. CIT (Central)-I vs. Chetan Gupta ITA No. 1891/Del/2012 dated 15.09.2015; 382 ITR 613 9. CIT vs. Ceban India Ltd. ITA No. 85 of 2009, Jul 7, 2009…

Nitin Chaturbhug Garg, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 41(3)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2568/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Natekar, ARFor Respondent: Assessee by
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69C

…ous decisions as under: 1. CIT vs. Shital Prasad Kharag Prasad [2006] 280 ITR 541 (All. HC) 2. Harsingar Gutkha Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT [2011] 336 ITR 90 (All. HC) 3. CIT Vs. Kanpur Plastipack Ltd. reported in (2017) 390 ITR 381 4. Y. Narayan Chetty vs. ITO (1959) 35 ITR 388 (SC); 5. CIT vs. Thayaballi Mulla Jeevaji Kapasi (1967) 66 ITR 147 (SC) 6. CIT vs. Kurban Hussain Ibrahimji Mithiborwala (1971) 82 ITR 821 (SC) 7. CIT vs. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. (296 ITR 0333) 8. CIT (Central)-I vs. Chetan Gupta ITA No. 1891/Del/2012 dated 15.09.2015; 382 ITR 613 9. CIT vs. Ceban India Ltd. ITA No. 85 of 2009, Jul 7, 2009…

Harjinder Singh, Patiala, Punjab vs. ITO Ward, Sunam, Punjab

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 510/CHANDI/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 282Section 69A

…ssessee and without such service of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessment order as passed by the Ld. AO deserves to be quashed as per binding case law of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. Income Tax Officer as reported in (1959) 35 ITR 388 (SC) and various other judgements including judgment of the jurisdictional Bench. 5. The appeal is accompanied by an application seeking condonation of a delay of ninety-seven days in filing before the Tribunal. 6. Briefly stated, the case of the assessee was reopened on the allegation of unexplained cash deposits aggregating to Rs.1,42,27,000 in…

Harjinder Singh, Patiala, Punjab vs. ITO Ward, Sunam, Punjab

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 509/CHANDI/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 282Section 69A

…ssessee and without such service of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessment order as passed by the Ld. AO deserves to be quashed as per binding case law of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. Income Tax Officer as reported in (1959) 35 ITR 388 (SC) and various other judgements including judgment of the jurisdictional Bench. 5. The appeal is accompanied by an application seeking condonation of a delay of ninety-seven days in filing before the Tribunal. 6. Briefly stated, the case of the assessee was reopened on the allegation of unexplained cash deposits aggregating to Rs.1,42,27,000 in…

Harjinder Singh, Patiala, Punjab vs. ITO Ward, Sunam, Punjab

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 508/CHANDI/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 282Section 69A

…ssessee and without such service of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessment order as passed by the Ld. AO deserves to be quashed as per binding case law of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. Income Tax Officer as reported in (1959) 35 ITR 388 (SC) and various other judgements including judgment of the jurisdictional Bench. 5. The appeal is accompanied by an application seeking condonation of a delay of ninety-seven days in filing before the Tribunal. 6. Briefly stated, the case of the assessee was reopened on the allegation of unexplained cash deposits aggregating to Rs.1,42,27,000 in…

Harjinder Singh, Patiala, Punjab vs. ITO Ward, Sunam, Punjab

In the result, all the above appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 507/CHANDI/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 282Section 69A

…ssessee and without such service of notice u/s 148 of the Act, the assessment order as passed by the Ld. AO deserves to be quashed as per binding case law of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. Income Tax Officer as reported in (1959) 35 ITR 388 (SC) and various other judgements including judgment of the jurisdictional Bench. 5. The appeal is accompanied by an application seeking condonation of a delay of ninety-seven days in filing before the Tribunal. 6. Briefly stated, the case of the assessee was reopened on the allegation of unexplained cash deposits aggregating to Rs.1,42,27,000 in…

Cognizance Constructions Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-1(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for

ITA 344/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.344/Hyd/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year 2013-2014 | M/S. Cognizance | Constructions Private | Limited, Hyderabad. | Pin – 500 075. Telangana. | Pan Aadcc1366M | (Appellant) Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Hyderabad. Telangana. (Respondent) निर्धारिती द्वारा/Assessee By: Ca Srinivas Maddury राजस्व द्वारा / Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing: 13.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Pronouncement: 15.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.12.2024 Of The Learned Cit(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre [In Short “Nfac], Delhi, For The

For Appellant: CA Srinivas MadduryFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271ASection 271F

…c.147 of the Act are illegal and void and consequently, the order passed by the Assessing Officer is liable to be quashed. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty vs., ITO [1959] 35 ITR 388 (SC) and submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that “the notice u/sec.34 of the I.T. Act, 1922, now u/sec.148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 cannot be regarded as a mere procedural requirement”. If the notice is not valid, then, the proceedings taken-up by the Assessing Officer would be illegal and void. He has relied upon the Judgment of Hon'b…

Mahavir Pukhraj Jain, Mumbai vs. The DCIT, Circle 42(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 379/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Girish Agrawalmahavir Pukhraj Jain Vs. Dcit, Circle – 42(1)(1) Flat No. 603/B, Manan Kautilya Bhawan, Apartment, New Link Road, Aenue -3, Near Videsh Dahisar East, Mumbai – Bhavan, G-Block, Bkc 400068. Bandra (E) – 400051 Pan/Gir No. Adepj8540R (Applicant) (Respondent)

Section 124(3)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

…DCIT without issuing a fresh notice u/s 148 of the Act. Hence in our view the ACIT / DCIT had not acquired jurisdiction to reassess the income of the assessee. In this regard reliance is being placed upon the decision in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. ITO 35 ITR 388, 392 (SC), CIT Vs. Maharaja Pratap Singh Bahadur 41 ITR 421(SC) & CIT Vs. Robert 48 ITR 177 (SC). 5 Mahavir Pukhraj Jain., Mumbai. 9. Even the Coordinate Bench of ITAT Delhi, in the case of Income-tax officer, Ward 11(4), Delhi Vs. M/s Indus Valley Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 4239/Del/2011] after considering the above ruling of apex…

Carissa Investment Pvt Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-5(2), New Delhi

Accordingly we are inclined to allow ground no. 2 in appeal of the assesse and that vitiates the whole assessment proceedings and the impugned assessment order. The appeal of assesse is allowed and...

ITA 901/DEL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaassessment Year: 2014-15 Carissa Investment Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, B-97, 2Nd Floor, Circle-5(2), Amrit Puri, Garhi, New Delhi. East Of Kailash, New Delhi – 110 065. Pan: Aaacc3277A Assessment Year: 2014-15 Acit, Vs. Carissa Investment Pvt. Ltd., B-97, 2Nd Floor, Circle-5(2), New Delhi Amrit Puri, Garhi, East Of Kailash, New Delhi – 110 065. Pan: Aaacc3277A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mayank Patawari, Advocate & Shri Aakash Ojha, Advocate Revenue By : Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.09.2025 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: These Are Cross Appeals Preferred By The Assessee As Well As The Revenue Against The Order Dated 14.11.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Patawari, Advocate &For Respondent: Ms Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 282Section 282(1)(c)

…available in the PAN database; Judicial Support: • CIT v. Kanpur Plastic Pack Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 34 (SC): Service at the address available in the PAN or company records is valid even if the assessee later claims non-receipt. • Y. Narayan Chetty v. ITO [1959] 35 ITR 388 (SC): Validity of service depends on proper despatch and adherence to prescribed modes, not on the recipient’s acknowledgment. Multiple Valid Modes of Service Used 3.10 When more than one valid mode is used to serve a notice, the presumption under the Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 114(f)) is that the notice was duly served unless the assessee dispr…

Anil Kumar Meena, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 834/JPR/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Sept 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Kanodia, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT
Section 147Section 148Section 250

…gistered FIR (PB No. 39 to 41) was also submitted alongwith the aforesaid letter before the ld. AO. Affidavit in this regard was filed before CIT (Appeals)(PB No. 42 to 43) this affidavit was never rejected by CIT appeals. As held in Y. Narayan Chetty v. ITO (35 ITR 388 SC), valid service of notice is jurisdictional; absence thereof vitiates reassessment. Thus, reassessment proceedings are void ab initio land deserve annulment. Therefore it is evident that notice could not be served and entire proceedings becomes null and void. Ground No. 3: Under the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT (A) was not j…

Sh. Hari Prakash Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), 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

…ndantly clear that he had not received the notice under section 147/148 of the Act. This argument does not, therefore, advance the case of the Revenue." 5.1. He has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty v. ITO [1959] 35 ITR 388 (SC) wherein it has been held as under (page 392): "The first point raised by Mr. Sastri is that the proceedings taken by respondent 1 under section 34 of the Act are invalid because the notice required to be issued under the said section has not been issued against the assessees contemplated therein. In the present case the Income-tax Officer ha…

Sh. Hari Prakash Gupta, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-1(2), 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

…dantly clear that he had not received the notice under section 147/148 of the Act. This argument does not, therefore, advance the case of the Revenue." 5. 1. He has relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Y. Narayana Chetty v. ITO [1959] 35 ITR 388 (SC) wherein it has been held as under (page 392): "The first point raised by Mr. Sastri is that the proceedings taken by respondent 1 under section 34 of the Act are invalid because the notice required to be issued under the said section has not been issued against the assessees contemplated therein. In the present case the Income-tax Officer has…

Kalyan Ratan Vijay, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward-5(3), Jaipur

ITA 571/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Sept 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Gupta, CA andFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT- DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 292BSection 69

…edent to the validity of any assessment under Section 147 of the Act; therefore, the assessment made pursuant to such notice is bad in law. In support of this proposition we rely upon the cases of Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. ITO, 35 ITR 388,392 (SC); CIT Vs. Maharaja Pratap singh Bahadur, 41 ITR 421 (SC); and CIT Vs. Robert, 48 ITR 177 (SC). In the light of the above settled principle of law, we have no hesitation to quash the reassessment proceedings since there was no valid notice pursuant to which the reassessment proceeding was made in the present case. Accordingly, the appeal fi…

Malkiat Agro Industries 01, Cantt Road, Nabha 147201, Punjab vs. Lovish Shelley the DCIT Circle Mandigobind Garh Jao Income Tax Officer Nabha, Punjab

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 485/CHANDI/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: SHRI. RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate and Shri K.K. Singla, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 133Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 148

…dent to the validity of any assessment under Section 147 of the Act; therefore, the assessment made pursuant to such notice is bad in law. In support of this proposition we rely upon the cases of Hon'ble Apex Court- in the cases of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. ITO, 35 ITR 388, 392 (SC); CIT Vs. Maharaja Pratap Singh Bahadur, 41 ITR 421 (SC); and CIT Vs. Robert, 48 ITR 177 (SC). In the light of the above titled principle of law, we have no hesitation to quash the re- assessment it proceedings since there was no valid notice pursuant to which the reassessment proceeding was made in the present case. Accordingly, the appe…

Raman Pillai Sivasankara Pillai, Baltana vs. DCIT, International Taxation, Circle, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 770/CHANDI/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 770/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Raman Pillai Sivasankara Vs. The Dcit, बनाम Pillai, #1590, Saini Vihar, International Taxation, Phase 3, Baltana, Chandigarh Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cjcpp4391J अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20 .01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, A.M.:

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCH, ‘B’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 770/CHD/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Raman Pillai Sivasankara Vs. The DCIT, बनाम Pillai, #1590, Saini Vihar, International Taxation, Phase 3, Baltana, Chandigarh Punjab "थायी लेखा सं./PAN No: CJCPP4391J अपीलाथ"/ APPELLANT ""यथ"/ REPSONDENT ( Physical Hearing) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. D…

State Bank of India, Nehru Palace, Tonk Road vs. ACIT, DCIT-TDS, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 728/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Gupta, C.A. &For Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT, Sr
Section 10(5)Section 191(1)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 292BSection 4(1)

…ch assessment year to issue statutory notice separately. The assessing Officer failed to comply with the statute under which the prescribed procedure is mandatory for the Revenue to be followed. The reliance of the ld.AR in case of Y. Narayana Chetty vs. ITO (35 ITR 388)(SC) is relevant in the present case, therefore, the notice itself is bad inlaw and void ab- initio. Thus, the assessment order does not survive. Thus ITA No. 3201/Del/2011 is allowed. There is no need to go into the merits of the case. Hence considering the aforesaid facts and judgments cited above, the order dated 19.02.2015 passed u/s 201(1) d…

The DCIT, Circle (International Taxation), Chandigarh vs. Sh. Manjeet Singh, Ludhiana

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed whereas, Cross

ITA 512/CHANDI/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D. Jain & Dr Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 512/Chd/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dcit, Vs. Shri Manjeet Singh, बनाम Circle (International S/O Shri Harbir Singh Taxation), # 1460, Ward Number-8, Chandigarh Gahlewal, Ludhiana 141008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cdeps4087A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent & C.O. No. 13/Chd/2022 ( In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 512/Chd/2022) "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Shri Manjeet Singh, Vs. The Dcit, बनाम S/O Shri Harbir Singh Circle (International # 1460, Ward Number-8, Taxation ), Gahlewal, Chandigarh Ludhiana 141008 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Cdeps4087A अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Dharamvir, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04.09.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…edent to the validity of any assessment under Section 147 of the Act; therefore, the assessment made pursuant to such notice is bad in law. In support of this proposition we rely upon the cases of Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. ITO, 35 ITR 388, 392 (SC); CIT Vs. 512-Chd-2022 & C.O.13-Chd-2022 Shri Manjeet Singh, Ludhiana 14 Maharaja Pratap Singh Bahadur, 41 ITR 421 (SC); and CIT Vs. Robert, 48 ITR 177 (SC). In the light of the above settled principle of law, we have no hesitation to quash the reassessment proceedings since there was no valid notice pursuant to which the reassessment p…

Shri Kishan, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3030/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Kishan S/O Late Jagmal Vs Income Tax Officer Singh, H. No.112, Near Shiv Ward- 4 (2) Mandir, Village & P.O. Gurgaon Nakhrola, Tehsil, Manesar Distt. Gurgaon – 122001 Pan No. Aaacp0165G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Manoj Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer S/O Late Sh. Jagdish Chander Ward-2 (4) Village P & O. Nakhrola Gurgaon Tehsil Manesar Gurgaon-122001 Pan No. Atvpm1063B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 548Section 54B

…s filed the paper book pages (103 &105-116). The notice was not issued in the correct status of the assessees. 12. Reliance has placed on the following judicial decisions as under :- 1. In the case of Apex Court in Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. ITO, Nellore ( 1959) 35 ITR 388 as under :- "The argument is that the service of the requisite notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the validity of any reassessment made under section 34; and if a valid notice is not issued as required, the proceedings taken by the Income-tax Officer in pursuance of an invalid notice and consequent orders of reassessment passed by…

Manoj Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Gurgaon

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3029/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Shri Kishan S/O Late Jagmal Vs Income Tax Officer Singh, H. No.112, Near Shiv Ward- 4 (2) Mandir, Village & P.O. Gurgaon Nakhrola, Tehsil, Manesar Distt. Gurgaon – 122001 Pan No. Aaacp0165G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2010-11 Sh. Manoj Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer S/O Late Sh. Jagdish Chander Ward-2 (4) Village P & O. Nakhrola Gurgaon Tehsil Manesar Gurgaon-122001 Pan No. Atvpm1063B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 548Section 54B

…s filed the paper book pages (103 &105-116). The notice was not issued in the correct status of the assessees. 12. Reliance has placed on the following judicial decisions as under :- 1. In the case of Apex Court in Y. Narayana Chetty Vs. ITO, Nellore ( 1959) 35 ITR 388 as under :- "The argument is that the service of the requisite notice on the assessee is a condition precedent to the validity of any reassessment made under section 34; and if a valid notice is not issued as required, the proceedings taken by the Income-tax Officer in pursuance of an invalid notice and consequent orders of reassessment passed by…