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. Civitech Housing India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ground No. 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above direction

ITA 1293/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishicivitech Housing India P Ltd, 65, Dcit, Central Circle-3, Room No. 356, 3Rd Shrestha Vihar, New Delhi 110092 Vs. Pan:Aabcc1465B Floor, E-2, Ara Centre, Jhandewalan Extn., New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Sanjay Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 127Section 127(2)Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…er of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Alpine Electronics Asia PTE Ltd Vs. Director General of Income-tax and others 341 ITR 247 (Del) and further in the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Pr. CIT Vs. Shri Jay Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd 383 ITR 448. He, therefore, submitted that failure to issue notice u/s 143(2) in accordance with the law invalidated the Assessment Year: 2006-07 Civitech Housing India P Ltd Vs. DCIT, Page 4 of 6 order of reassessment. On the issue of reopening, it was submitted that the reasons recorded are merely suspicion expressed and all the details were available wit…

Ing Beewaar Maatschappij I B.V. As Trustee of Ing, Mumbai vs. Addl DIT (It) RG 3, Mumbai

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

ITA 5276/MUM/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri Dhanesh Bafna & MsFor Respondent: Shri Jabir Chauhan, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 292B

…he provisions of section 292BB of the Act, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our attention to various decisions viz (i) Travancore Diagnostics (P.) Ltd vs. ACIT (2016) 74 Taxmann.com 239 (Kerla); (ii) Pr. CIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders (P) Ltd (2016) 383 ITR 448 (Delhi HC); (iii) CIT vs. Salarpur Cold Storage (P.) Ltd (2015) 228 Taxman 48 (Allahabad) and submitted that the provisions of section 292BB of the Act do no cure the defects of this kind. In this regard, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on various other decisions ie (i) Rajib Saikia vs. ACIT [2015] 154 ITD 405 (Guwahati Trib) (ii) ACIT vs. Ash…

Saurabh Bankimchandra Dani, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 339/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Bharath JanarthananFor Respondent: Miss Kusum Bansal
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 292B

…y CIT(A) during appellate proceedings wherein, AO has clearly accepted that no notice under Section 143(2) was issued. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Delhi High Court 2 Saurabh Bankimchandra Dani in the case of Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd., 383 ITR 448, Bangalore High Court in the case of Ashed Properties & Investments (P) Ltd., 62 taxmann.com 340 and on the decision of Chandigarh Tribunal in case of Sanjeev Aggarwal 159 ITD 302 in support of proposition that assessment framed without issue of notice under Section 143(2) is null and void. It was also contention of learned A.R that reasons recor…

Ganesh Construction Co., Mumbai vs. ITO WD 19(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1179/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singhm/S. Ganesh Construction Co., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Fat No. Bhoomi Tower, A-Wing, Ward- 22 (1) (5), Mumbai Opp. Jain Temple, Santracruz (E), Mumbai 400 055 Pan:Aagfg 3076 L Appellant .. Respondent .. Appellant By Shri C. V. Dharkar, Ar Respondent By .. Shri K. L. Kanak, Sr. Dr .. Date Of Hearing 10-08-2016 Date Of Pronouncement .. 10-08-2016 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Preferred Against The Order Of The Cit (A)- 34, Mumbai In Appeal No.Cit (A)-34/Ito-19(2)(3)/It-223/13-14 Dated 30-12-2014. Assessment Was Framed By The Ito, Ward -19 (2) (3), Mumbai Vide His Order Dated 22-03-2013 For The Assessment Year 2009-10 U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter “The Act”).

Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…filed may be treated as the return filed in response to the notice u/s 148 of the Act. The learned Counsel for the assessee drew my attention to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. [2016] 383 ITR 448 (Delhi). He also referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Pr. CIT Vs Silver Line [2016 383 ITR 455 (Delhi). 4. On the other hand, the learned Sr. DR contested the arguments of the learned Counsel for the assessee that the assessee has filed return or income and even the letter filed by him indicates that the letter…

Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-08 vs. Staunch Marketing Pvt. Ltd

ITA/935/2015HC Delhi28 Apr 2015
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 148Section 260A

…andatory nature of that requirement is settled not only by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of ACIT v. Hotel Blue Moon (supra) but also by a decision of this court in Commissioner of Income Tax-08 v. Jai Shiv Shankar Traders Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 388 ITR 448 Del. 15. For all the aforementioned reasons, the question framed does not arise 2015:DHC:3866-DB ITA 935/2015 Page 6 of 6 in the present appeal and is declined to be answered. In any event, the court does not find any substantial question of law arise from the impugned order. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.…