What is Pannalal Binjraj v. Union of India authority for?

An assessee has no fundamental right to be assessed by a particular Assessing Officer or at a specific place. Orders transferring a case are administrative, for better revenue administration, and are not justiciable unless mala fides or clear prejudice is proven, with inconvenience not being a valid ground.

How many judgments cite Pannalal Binjraj v. Union of India?

46 judgments on BharatTax cite Pannalal Binjraj v. Union of India (31 ITR 565), spanning 2014 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Pannalal Binjraj v. Union of India come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 127, Section 124, Section 142(1), Section 144, Section 144C, Section 115BBE.

Pannalal Binjraj v. Union of India (31 ITR 565)

M/S. Mahavir Civil Engineering & Services Pvt. Ltd., Jalgaon vs. Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax (Central)

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 942/PUN/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

Section 127Section 133ASection 139Section 263Section 292BSection 80I

…urisdiction of the Assessing Officer to whom the case has been transferred. The assessee cannot be allowed latter to challenge the jurisdiction of the 8 Assessing Officer as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj vs. Union of India, 31 ITR 565 (SC) and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Shivabhai Khodabhai Patel vs. CIT, 244 ITR 457 (Guj.-HC). The Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Steel Engg. & Processing Works vs. Union of India, 243 ITR 721 (Pat.-HC) after referring to the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj (supra) held to the same…

Dellip V. Kotecha, Jalgaon vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 203/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.203/Pun/2016 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dellip V. Kotecha, Vs. Acit, Central Circle- 1, 1, Pradhan Apartment, Nashik. Pratap Nagar, Jalgaon- 425001. Pan : Abcpk8441J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue By : Shri J. P. Chadraker Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.04.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 12, Pune [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 22.12.2015 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “[A] Grounds Of Appeal: 1. In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Learned A.O. Erred In Assessing The Total Income Amounting To Rs.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

Section 127Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 234A

…jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to whom the case has been transferred. The assessee cannot be allowed latter to challenge the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj vs. Union of India, 31 ITR 565 (SC) and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Shivabhai Khodabhai Patel vs. CIT, 244 ITR 457 (Guj.-HC). The Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Steel Engg. & Processing Works vs. Union of India, 243 ITR 721 (Pat.-HC) after referring to the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj (supra) held to the same…

Smt. Jyoti Ashok Kotecha vs. C.I.T.-(Central), Nagpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 258/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

Section 127Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 292B

…jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to whom the case has been transferred. The assessee cannot be allowed latter to challenge the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj vs. Union of India, 31 ITR 565 (SC) and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Shivabhai Khodabhai Patel vs. CIT, 244 ITR 457 (Guj.-HC). The Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Steel Engg. & Processing Works vs. Union of India, 243 ITR 721 (Pat.-HC) after referring to the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj (supra) held to the same…

Smt. Meena Dilip Kotecha vs. C.I.T.-(Central), Nagpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 257/NAG/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Apr 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravisl.

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker

Section 127Section 139Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 263Section 292B

…jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer to whom the case has been transferred. The assessee cannot be allowed latter to challenge the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj vs. Union of India, 31 ITR 565 (SC) and the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Shivabhai Khodabhai Patel vs. CIT, 244 ITR 457 (Guj.-HC). The Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Steel Engg. & Processing Works vs. Union of India, 243 ITR 721 (Pat.-HC) after referring to the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Binjraj (supra) held to the same…

ITO, Ward- 2(2), New Delhi vs. Almak Finance Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 4504/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Mrs. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR

Section 120Section 124(1)Section 127Section 139(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148

…the place where the assessee is carrying on business or over the place where he is residing, if there is no business, would have jurisdiction, and any assessment passed by any other officer would be illegal." In Pannalal Binjraj vs. Union of India AIR (1956) 31 ITR 565 (SC) their Lordships have vide para. 20 analysed the scheme of the provisions in the IT Act relating to jurisdiction and transfer of cases. Their Lordships have held that an assessee is entitled to be assessed by the ITO of the particular area where he resides and carries on his business. If a question may arise as to the place of assessment it is…

Addl CIT RG 24(1), Mumbai vs. Arun Damji Gada, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed whereas appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 105/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jan 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Shri Arun Damji Gada Vs. Acit 24(1) A-103, God Gift Adarsha Pratyshakar Bhawan Dugdhalaya Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex Adarsh Nagar, Adarsh Dhughala Bandra (E) Lane, Malad (W) Mumbai – 400 050 Mumbai – 400 064 Pan/Gir No.Aabpg3923F Appellant) .. Respondent) Acit 24(1) Vs. Shri Arun Damji Gada C-13 R/Nop, 503 A-103, God Gift Adarsha Pratyshakar Bhawan Dugdhalaya Lane, Bandra Kurla Complex Adarsh Nagar, Adarsh Bandra (E) Dhughala Lane, Malad (W) Mumbai – 400 050 Mumbai – 400 064 Pan/Gir No. Aabpg3923F Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 80I

…choose or timing mismatch cannot arbitrarily be resorted to in any quasi-judicial proceedings like the assessment proceedings under the IT Act, 1961 here in the instant case. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pannalal Brijlal vs. Union of India (1957) 31 ITR 565 (SC) observed that provisions of IT Act, 1961 should be applied in a humane and considered manner. I appreciate the contentions of the Assessing Officer and rebuttals by the Ld. Authorized Representatives of the appellant on AS-7 and for that matter on AS-9. However, it is also to be realized that mere accounting entries or lack of entries or its…

V.N.G.Mercantile Private Limited, Kolkata vs. I.T.O WD - 5(4), Kolkata

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

ITA 2332/KOL/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Apr 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Him. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ld.Ao. 4. For That In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Disallowing Entire Administrative Expense Amounting To Rs.2,99,255/- While Passing The Assessment Order. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming The Action Of The Ld.Ao. 5. For That The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Delete All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal At The Time Of Hearing.

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 74

…ever be the legislative intent. It shocks the very conscience if in the circumstances section 143(1A) could be invoked to levy the additional tax. The following observations by the Constitution Bench of this court in Pannalal Binjraj v. Union of India [1957] 31 ITR 565 are apt. (page 597): "A humane and considerate administration of the relevant provisions of the Income- tax Act would go a long way in allaying the apprehensions of the assessees and if that is done in the true spirit, no assessee will be in a position to charge the Revenue with administering the provisions of the Act with an evil eye and unequal…