Pr. CIT v. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd.

383 ITR 448High Court2016#1040 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

The issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act is a mandatory jurisdictional requirement for completing an assessment or reassessment. Failure to issue this notice renders the assessment order invalid, even if the return of income is filed belatedly or in response to a Section 148 notice.

105

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. · 383 ITR 448 · Section 143(2) notice · mandatory requirement · Section 148 reassessment · jurisdictional defect · invalid assessment · belated return · failure to issue notice · reassessment proceedings quashed

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 148Section 147Section 143(3)Section 292BBSection 144Section 142(1)Section 250
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 133(a)section 153b(1)(a)section 148(1)section 292bbtime barred assessmentsection 153(1)(a)bona fide mistakesection 90asection 153b(1)section 153(4)section 158bcsection 292b

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd.

M/S. Ajanta Merchants Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 8(1), Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 606/KOL/2022[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Mar 2023AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…said to have complied with the requirement of filling the return of income in response to notice issued u/s 148. It is however observed that this aspect has already been considered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. 383 ITR 448 cited on behalf of the assessee and relied upon by the Ld. CIT(A) in his impugned order wherein a letter was filed by the assessee on 16.12.2010 informing the AO that the return originally filed should be treated as the return filed pursuant to the notice u/s 148. The AO thereafter, proceeded to complete the reassessment without issuing a notice…

Diya Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 7(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated herein above

ITA 1929/DEL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Diya Infrastructure Pvt.Ltd., Vs Ito, 1373, Rani Bagh, Shakur Ward-7(3), Basti, Delhi-110034. New Delhi. Pan-Aaccd3991L Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Rano Jain, Adv. & Ms. Mansi Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri Sanjay Nargas, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 15.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 16.03.2023

Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…iance is placed on the following judgments:- • Indus Towers Limited v. Dy. CIT, W.P.(C) 1560/2014, dt. 29.05.2017, Delhi High Court SLP dismissed by Supreme Court, [SLP No. 34285/2018 dt. 21.1.2019] • Pro CIT v. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd., [2016] 383 ITR 448, Delhi High Court • Pro CIT v. Staunch Marketing Pvt. Ltd., ITA NO. 935/2015 dt. 28.04.2017 • CIT v. Delhi Kalyan Samiti, ITA No. 696, 697, 699/2015 dt. 22.03.2016 • Pro CIT v. Silver Line, [2016] 383 ITR 455, Delhi High Court • Alpine Electronics Asia PTE Ltd. v. Director General Of Income Tax & Others, [2012] 341 ITR 247, Delhi High Court • Pro…

Subhash Gujar, Jhajjar vs. ITO, Ward-4, Rohtak

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 6053/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…) is filed in the Paper Book hence it is proven on record that department had not issued any notice u/s 143(2) before assessing the income of the appellant u/s 143(3). 1.2 Appellant’s case is covered by following judgements:- 321 ITR 362 (SC) Hotel Blue Moon 383 ITR 448 (Del) Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. 383 ITR 455 (Del) Silver Line 398 ITR 701 (Del) Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd. 323 ITR 249 (Del) Society for Wordwide Inter Bank Financial Telecom 1.3 In his written submission dt. 8.3.202, Ld. DR is trying to take shelter u/s 292BB of the Act. In this regard, it is to submit that non issuance of n…

Sanjay Singh, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward- 2(4), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 420/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Gargassessment Year: 2010-11 Sanjay Singh, Income Tax Officer, Chamber No.64, Tehsil Vs. Ward-2(4), Compound,Gandhi Nagar, Ghaziabad.Uttar Pradesh. Ghaziabad. Pan: Asxps4165R (Appellant) (Respondent) Shri Anoop Sharma & For Assessee : Shri Sanjay Prashar, Advocates For Revenue : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay PrasharFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271

…Moon reported in 321 ITR 362 (SC) has been referred. I find even provision of Section 292BB of the I.T. Act, 1961 does not cure non-issuance of notice as held by Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs., Jai Shiv Shankar Traders [2016] 383 ITR 448 (Del.). For better appreciation of the issue in dispute, the 12 ITA.No.420/Del./2020 Shri Sanjay Singh, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. relevant observations of the Coordinate Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Flovel Energy Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs., ACIT, Circle-9(1), New Delhi (supra) are reproduced as under : 18. “We find, under identical circu…

DCIT Circle-25(1), New Delhi vs. Three Sixty Degrees Marketing Support Pvt Ltd, New Delhi

Appeal are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4016/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Gupta, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sita Ram Meena
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151

…ase can be distinguished from the present one, as in the referred case, the notice u/s 143 (2) was issued prior to the date of filling of the ITR. Hence the decision is not applicable in the present case. b) Pr. CIT vs. Sh. Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd, 383 ITR 448: This case was referred by Ld. CIT(A), however it is seen that in the referred case, the notice under section 143(2) was not issued at all. 3 DCIT Vs. Three Sixty Degrees Marketing Support Therefore this case is also not applicable in the present matter. “ 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee was not filed its return of income fo…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Imtiaz Farooqi, Secunderabad

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 546/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2009-10 The Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. Sri Imtiaz Farooqi, Income Tax, 1397, Nagarjuna Nagar, Central Circle 1(3), Street No.20, Tarnaka, Hyderabad. Secunderabad. Pan : Aadpf1807D. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca Revenue By: Sri Rajendra Kumar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 21.03.2022 O R D E R Per S. S. Godara, J.M. This Revenue’S Appeal For A.Y 2009-10 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 11, Hyderabad’S Order Dated 14.07.2020 In Appeal No.11203/2016-17 Involving Proceedings Under Section 143(3) R.W.S. 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri Rajendra Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292B

…whereas the assessee had filed his letter dt.26.09.2016. We thus hold that not only the CIT(A) has quoted the relevant case law that such a notice is not a valid one since issued in absence of a return but also there is case law PCIT Vs. Shri Jay Shiv Sankar 383 ITR 448 (Delhi) directly covering the issue against the department and in assessee’s favour. We thus reject the Revenue’s arguments seeking to apply the procedural aspect u/s 292BB of the Act on the instant legal issue and confirm the CIT(A)’s findings quashing the impugned re-assessment. The Revenue fails in its sole substantive grievance therefore. 3…

M/S Khaitan Winding Wire Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir. 4(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 587/KOL/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am ]

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…to the 147/148 notice. For that we rely on the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Iqbal Singh Atwal Vs. CIT (1984) 147 ITR 599 (Cal) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 (Del.). Since no notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act had been issued by the AO before framing reassessment order dated 26.12.2018 it is bad in law because the A.O had no jurisdiction to frame the reassessment order dated 26.12.2018 without issuing the mandatory notice and therefore, all subsequent action is null in the eyes of the law and therefore we…

Indian Clothing League(P) Ltd., Noida vs. ITO, Ward-26(2), New Delhi

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

ITA 505/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Pandaassessment Year: 2011-12 Indian Clothing League (P) Ltd., Vs. Ito, Rupinder Kumar Aggarwal, Ward-26(2), Advocate, B-1A/22H, New Delhi. Sector-51, Noida. Pan: Aaccv3439R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Lalit Mohan, Ca Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.02.2022 Order

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…43(3) of the Act, order of assessment so framed is without jurisdiction and deserves to be quashed as such:- i) ACIT v. Hotel blue Moon 321 ITR 362 (SC); ii) CIT v. Laxman Das Khandelwal 417 ITR 325 (SC); iii) PCIT v. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd 383 ITR 448 (Del); iv) Pr. CIT v. Silver Line and Anr 383 ITR 455 (Del); v) PCIT v. Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd. 398 ITR 701 (Del) ; and vi) CIT v. Delhi Kalyan Samiti ITA No. 696/2015 (Del) dated 22.3.2016 8. Referring to the order of the CIT(A) at para 4.2.2., he submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has given a finding that issuance of notice u/s 143(2) w…

Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3-1, Jaipur

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 441/JPR/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 441/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Cuke I.T.O. Vs. B-105, Vaishali Nagar, Ward- 3(1), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Bgvps 4485 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta & Shri S.L. Jain (Advs.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By :Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13/07/2017 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. The Reasons For Reopening Of The Assessment Not Valid :- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Ao Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Invoking Action U/S 147.The Notice For Reassessment Is So Hastily Issued Without Examining The Correct Factual & Legal Position. The Action For Reassessment Is Often Made Without Application Of Mind Fairly & Objectively The Ao. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 Itr 437 (Sc)

For Appellant: Shri Ashok kr. Gupta &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234ASection 68

…ed strictly -- Income Tax Act, 1961, ss. 143, 148. It is further submitted that even if the return of income was filed after the issue of notice u/s 142(1), the Hon'ble Delhi court in the case of PCIT-08 vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar traders Pvt. Ltd. reported in 383 ITR 448 - (Delhi) (Case laws Paper book pages 29-31) has held that the issue of notice u/s 143(2) is not a procedural requirement and is mandatory and completion of assessment without issue of notice u/s 143(2) is fatal to the assessment. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court had further held that issuance and service of notice U/s 143(2) of the Act is s…

M/S Dudley Capital Market Ltd, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-10(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 220/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap(Kz) & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 139Section 142Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

…to the 147/148 notice. For that we rely on the judgment of the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Iqbal Singh Atwal Vs. CIT (1984) 147 ITR 599 (Cal) and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 (Del.). Therefore, the notice issued by A.O u/s 143(2) dated 12.12.2013 is hit by the 1st Proviso to section 143(2) of the Act and therefore the A.O had no jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 143(2) after 31.08.2013 and therefore the issuance of notice u/s 143(2) dated 12.12.2013 and all subsequent action is null in the eyes of the law and therefore…

ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat vs. Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in (ITA No

ITA 1503/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1503/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Shri Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat. Prop. Of Seema Impex, 401, 6/1582, Kumbhar Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Revenue) (Assessee) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1461/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Deepak S. Mehta, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), C/O. 302, Nishit Diamond Complex, Surat. Gujjar Falia, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Assessee) (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri Himashu Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151

…ion (supra) is not of any assistance to the Revenue as far as the issue in the present case is concerned. This is important to mention that the same Delhi High Court in its subsequent decision in the case of Pr. CIT v/s Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd. (383 ITR 448) has overturned the earlier ruling given in case of Madhya Bharat energy Corporation (after duly considering this decision) and held that failure of assessing officer to issue notice u/s 143(2) is fatal to order of reassessment and such failure cannot be condoned by referring to section 292BB of the Act. Thus, decision in the case of Madhya Bhara…

Deepak S. Mehta, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in (ITA No

ITA 1461/AHD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1503/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), Vs. Shri Dipakkumar S. Mehta, Surat. Prop. Of Seema Impex, 401, 6/1582, Kumbhar Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Revenue) (Assessee) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1461/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) Shri Deepak S. Mehta, Vs. The Ito, Ward-2(3)(7), C/O. 302, Nishit Diamond Complex, Surat. Gujjar Falia, Mahidharpura, Surat-395009. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Afapm8151K (Assessee) (Revenue)

For Appellant: Shri Himashu Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 151

…ion (supra) is not of any assistance to the Revenue as far as the issue in the present case is concerned. This is important to mention that the same Delhi High Court in its subsequent decision in the case of Pr. CIT v/s Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd. (383 ITR 448) has overturned the earlier ruling given in case of Madhya Bharat energy Corporation (after duly considering this decision) and held that failure of assessing officer to issue notice u/s 143(2) is fatal to order of reassessment and such failure cannot be condoned by referring to section 292BB of the Act. Thus, decision in the case of Madhya Bhara…

Income Tax Officer Ward 2(3)(7), Surat vs. Shri Atul Kailashchandra Mehta, Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue ( in ITA No

ITA 107/SRT/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.106/Srt/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Income Tax Officer, V Shri Mukesh Mahavirprasad Sen, Ward-2(3(8), Surat. 6/1862-63, 3Rd Floor, Office S. No.305, Ghanshyam Bhuvan, Bal Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bcsps 0173 F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.107/Srt/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Income Tax Officer, V Shri Atul Kailashchandra Mehta, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat. S. 7/2496, Office No.2, Shastru Chambers, Maznine Floor, Chandulal Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alxpm 7834 Q (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya - Ca Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Mishra – Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/09/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini:

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya - CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra – CIT(DR)
Section 132(4)Section 144

…ion (supra) is not of any assistance to the Revenue as far as the issue in the present case is concerned. This is important to mention that the same Delhi High Court in its subsequent decision in the case of Pr. CIT v/s Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd. (383 ITR 448) has overturned the earlier ruling given in case of Madhya Bharat energy Corporation (after duly considering this decision) and held that failure of assessing officer to issue notice u/s 143(2) is fatal to order of reassessment and such failure cannot be condoned by referring to section 292BB of the Act. Thus, decision in the case of Madhya Bhara…

Income Tax Officer Ward 2(3)(8), Surat vs. Shri Mukesh Mahavir Prasad Sen, Surat

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue ( in ITA No

ITA 106/SRT/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Sept 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.106/Srt/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2007-08) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Income Tax Officer, V Shri Mukesh Mahavirprasad Sen, Ward-2(3(8), Surat. 6/1862-63, 3Rd Floor, Office S. No.305, Ghanshyam Bhuvan, Bal Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bcsps 0173 F (Assessee) (Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.107/Srt/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2008-09) (Virtual Court Hearing) The Income Tax Officer, V Shri Atul Kailashchandra Mehta, Ward-2(3)(7), Surat. S. 7/2496, Office No.2, Shastru Chambers, Maznine Floor, Chandulal Sheri, Mahidharpura, Surat. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Alxpm 7834 Q (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya - Ca Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Mishra – Cit(Dr) सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 17/06/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/09/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini:

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Vijayvargiya - CAFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra – CIT(DR)
Section 132(4)Section 144

…ion (supra) is not of any assistance to the Revenue as far as the issue in the present case is concerned. This is important to mention that the same Delhi High Court in its subsequent decision in the case of Pr. CIT v/s Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd. (383 ITR 448) has overturned the earlier ruling given in case of Madhya Bharat energy Corporation (after duly considering this decision) and held that failure of assessing officer to issue notice u/s 143(2) is fatal to order of reassessment and such failure cannot be condoned by referring to section 292BB of the Act. Thus, decision in the case of Madhya Bhara…

Parminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

ITA 6702/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…er Singh Kalra decision has been reviewed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in revenue Petition No. 441/2011 vide order dated 17.08.2011. This fact has been noted by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 dated 14.10.2015 and it has been held that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act as well. Further, he submitted that a number of judgments have been pronounced by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein the Court has taken a view that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act…

Parminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-14, New Delhi

ITA 6701/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…er Singh Kalra decision has been reviewed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in revenue Petition No. 441/2011 vide order dated 17.08.2011. This fact has been noted by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 dated 14.10.2015 and it has been held that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act as well. Further, he submitted that a number of judgments have been pronounced by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein the Court has taken a view that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Parminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi

ITA 5334/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…er Singh Kalra decision has been reviewed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in revenue Petition No. 441/2011 vide order dated 17.08.2011. This fact has been noted by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 dated 14.10.2015 and it has been held that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act as well. Further, he submitted that a number of judgments have been pronounced by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein the Court has taken a view that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Parminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi

ITA 5333/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…er Singh Kalra decision has been reviewed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in revenue Petition No. 441/2011 vide order dated 17.08.2011. This fact has been noted by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 dated 14.10.2015 and it has been held that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act as well. Further, he submitted that a number of judgments have been pronounced by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein the Court has taken a view that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Parminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi

ITA 5332/DEL/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…er Singh Kalra decision has been reviewed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in revenue Petition No. 441/2011 vide order dated 17.08.2011. This fact has been noted by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 dated 14.10.2015 and it has been held that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act as well. Further, he submitted that a number of judgments have been pronounced by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein the Court has taken a view that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Parminder Singh Kalra, New Delhi

ITA 5330/DEL/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jun 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Sh. Ved Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 153A

…er Singh Kalra decision has been reviewed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in revenue Petition No. 441/2011 vide order dated 17.08.2011. This fact has been noted by the Hon’ble High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 383 ITR 448 dated 14.10.2015 and it has been held that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act as well. Further, he submitted that a number of judgments have been pronounced by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court wherein the Court has taken a view that it is mandatory to issue notice u/s 143(2) in proceedings u/s 147 of the Act…