Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal

345 ITR 29High Court2012#2036 most cited

What is Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal authority for?

Section 292BB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is a rule of evidence that validates service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that if an assessee appears in any proceeding or cooperates in any inquiry relating to assessment or reassessment, it shall be deemed that any required notice was duly served, precluding objection to such service.

56

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal · Section 292BB · service of notice · deemed service · appearance before tax authorities · cooperation in inquiry · rule of evidence · validation of notice

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 292BBSection 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 119Section 120

Issues it is cited on

section 2(7a)section 292bbsection 120section 292bsection 158bcsection 292section 29assistant directorservice of noticesection 260section 260asection 127

Judgments citing Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal

Sh. Dhirendra Nath Trivedy, Uttar Pradesh vs. DCIT, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 319/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jan 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2011-12 Sh. Dhirendra Nath Trivedy, Dcit, Circle-1, C-4014, Gaur Green City, Vs. Ghaziabad Vaibhav Kahdn, Indirapuram, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh (Pan: Accpt8767F) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Appellant) (Respondent) (Respondent) (Respondent) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Adv, ShFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

…the AO/ITO, Patna is without jurisdiction and assessment so framed in pursuance thereto should be quashed as such. In support of this contention he relied upon the following cases:- - CIT & Anr. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal (Allahabad High Court) as reported in 345 ITR 29 - CIT & Anr. Vs. Bihari Lal Agrawal (Allahabad High Court) reported in 346 ITR 67 - CIT vs. Cebon India Ltd. (Punjab & Haryana High Court) reported in 347 ITR 583 - CIT vs. Vishnu & Co. P Ltd. (Delhi High Court) reported in 319 ITR 151 - CIT vs. Bhan Textiles (P) Ltd. (Delhi High Court) reported in 287 ITR 287 - Madan Singh Kangarot vs. ITO (…

Renuka G., Bellary vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 416/BANG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri A.K. Garodiaassessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri S. Venkatesan, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Sibichen K. Mathew, CIT-III(DR)
Section 143(2)Section 292B

…Cold Storage (P) Ltd. , (2014) 50 Taxman.Com.105 = 2014-TIOL- Page 8 of 13 1522-HC-ALL-IT, Commissioner of Income-tax, Faizabad Vs. Adarsh Travel Bus Service, (2012) 17 taxmann. Co 140(All.) as well as in Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal, 345 ITR 29 and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Rajeev Sharma, (2010) 192 Taxman 197 (All.) = 2010-TIOL-381- HC-ALL-IT. 16. In the light of the aforesaid decisions, it is apparently clear that the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to make an assessment under Section 143(3) (ii) of the Act is based on the issuance of a notice under Section 143(2)(ii) of the…

ITO, Ward - 56(4), Kolkata vs. M/S. Nopany & Sons, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1621/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 292B

…2) cannot be a procedural irregularity and the same is not curable and, therefore, the requirement of notice under section 143(2) cannot be dispensed with." • Commissioner of Income-Tax and Another v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal [IN THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] [2012] 345 ITR 29 (All): In this case, the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held as under: "The Tribunal returned the findings that the assessing authority did not have jurisdiction / to proceed further and make assessment since notice under section 143(2) of the Income- tax Act, 1961, was admittedly not issued. On appeal contending that the Commissioner (Appeals) and…

M/S. Nopany & Sons, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 56(4), Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1301/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 127Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 292B

…2) cannot be a procedural irregularity and the same is not curable and, therefore, the requirement of notice under section 143(2) cannot be dispensed with." • Commissioner of Income-Tax and Another v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal [IN THE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] [2012] 345 ITR 29 (All): In this case, the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court held as under: "The Tribunal returned the findings that the assessing authority did not have jurisdiction / to proceed further and make assessment since notice under section 143(2) of the Income- tax Act, 1961, was admittedly not issued. On appeal contending that the Commissioner (Appeals) and…

DCIT vs. M/S Asha Business Centre Ltd

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands allowed, while the appeal by the department is dismissed

ITA 1577/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…tice u/s. 143(2), hence appeal in this ground is rejected.” 6. Aggrieved, the assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri A. Shankar, relied on the following decisions:- i) CIT v. Mukesh Kumar Agarwal [2012] 345 ITR 29 (All) ii) ACIT v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority [2015] 379 ITR 14 (All) iii) Principal CIT v. Silver Line (2016) 129 DTR 191 (Del) iv) CIT v. Gitsons Engineering Company [2015] 370 ITR 87 ITA Nos.1577 & 1400/Bang/2013 Page 5 of 6 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala relied on the decisions in the case of A…

M/S Asha Business Centre Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal by the assessee stands allowed, while the appeal by the department is dismissed

ITA 1400/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala, Jt. CIT(DR)
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…tice u/s. 143(2), hence appeal in this ground is rejected.” 6. Aggrieved, the assessee has preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 7. The ld. counsel for the assessee, Shri A. Shankar, relied on the following decisions:- i) CIT v. Mukesh Kumar Agarwal [2012] 345 ITR 29 (All) ii) ACIT v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority [2015] 379 ITR 14 (All) iii) Principal CIT v. Silver Line (2016) 129 DTR 191 (Del) iv) CIT v. Gitsons Engineering Company [2015] 370 ITR 87 ITA Nos.1577 & 1400/Bang/2013 Page 5 of 6 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR, Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwala relied on the decisions in the case of A…

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

…bmitted that the defect of non-issuance of notice is not curable even under the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs Cebon India Ltd. (2012) 347 ITR 583 (P&H) " CIT Vs Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All) " CIT Vs Bihari Lal Agrawal (2012) 346 ITR 67 (All) " CIT Vs Dr. Ajay Prakash (2014) 42 Taxmann.com 387 (All) 8. In his rival submissions the ld. DR strongly supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and further submitted that the assessee had not taken any objection for non-issuance of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act before the AO and participated…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/585/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/586/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/580/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/581/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/578/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/579/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/587/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -18 vs. Silver Line

ITA/588/2015HC Delhi04 Nov 2015
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260A

…in answering a similar question, the Court referred to its earlier decision in Commissioner 2015:DHC:9180-DB ITA No. 578 of 2015 & connected matters Page 10 of 15 of Income Tax v. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal (2012) 345 ITR 29 (All.) and pointed out that Section 292BB of the Act was a rule of evidence which validated service of notice in certain circumstances. It introduces a deeming fiction that once the Assessee appears in any proceeding or has cooperated in any enquiry relating to assessment or reassessment it shall be deemed that any notice under any provision…

ITO, New Delhi vs. Smt. Kushal Timber (P) Ltd, Delhi

ITA 578/DEL/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt Beena Pillaii.T.A .No.578/Del/2010 (Assessment Year-2004-05)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292Section 69

…e was of reassessment u/s 148 and the Court has held that no reliance can be on the provisions of Section 292BB since this provision was not applicable to the assessment year 2001-02. 21. Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT & Anr. Vs. Mukesh Kumar Agrawal 345 ITR 29 (All) has dealt with the provisions of Section 292BB of the Act. In this case the revenue raised a contention that in view of the provisions of Section 292BB, the assessment cannot be quashed in case notice u/s 143(2) has not been issued. The Allahabad High Court has rejected the contention and has held as under:- "Section 292BB is a rule of evi…