Pr. CIT v. Silver Line

383 ITR 455High Court2016#461 most cited

What is Pr. CIT v. Silver Line authority for?

For reassessment under Section 147, the Assessing Officer must record reasons and communicate them to the assessee. An assessee's participation in proceedings pursuant to a Section 148 notice does not obviate the mandatory requirement of recording and communicating reasons or issuing a Section 143(2) notice.

201

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Silver Line · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 143(2) · reassessment notice · recording reasons · communication of reasons · assessee participation · procedural defect · mandatory requirement · waiver of notice

Also reported as

65 Taxmann.com 137

Sections most often in play

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 292BBSection 139Section 271(1)(c)Section 282
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 10(31a)section 100section 76section 142(2c)section 153b(1)(b)section 153b(1)rectification under section 154section 144basection 158bcsection 206csection 206statement under section 132(4)

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Silver Line

Ballu Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -65(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 800/DEL/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…assessment and later on re-confirmed by the CIT(A)- XXI in our presence. Hence, following the decision of the Supreme Court in ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (supra) and the jurisdictional Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PR. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Silver Line [(383 ITR 455), (paper book page no. 166-174) Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (341 ITR 247), CIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Pvt. Ltd [(383 ITR 448), (paper book page no. 179-187)], Indus Tower Limited vs. CIT, judgment dated 29/05/2017, the hon’ble courts on various occasions has concluded that for completion of the assessment under Section 148 of th…

Ballu Singh, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward -65(5), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 799/DEL/2020[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44ASection 69A

…assessment and later on re-confirmed by the CIT(A)- XXI in our presence. Hence, following the decision of the Supreme Court in ACIT Vs. Hotel Blue Moon (supra) and the jurisdictional Hon’ble Delhi High Court in PR. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Silver Line [(383 ITR 455), (paper book page no. 166-174) Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (341 ITR 247), CIT vs. Shri Jai Shiv Shankar Pvt. Ltd [(383 ITR 448), (paper book page no. 179-187)], Indus Tower Limited vs. CIT, judgment dated 29/05/2017, the hon’ble courts on various occasions has concluded that for completion of the assessment under Section 148 of th…

Garud Credit & Holding Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O WD - 9(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1270/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 1270/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Garud Credit & Holding Pvt. Limited,.........Appellant D.J. Shah & Co., 2, Elgin Road, Kolkata-700020 [Pan: Aaacg9791P] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,.................................Respondent Ward-9(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700069 Appearances By: Shri Veekaas S. Sharma, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri P.P. Barman, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 06, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 01, 2023 O R D E R

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 35DSection 68

…e High Court of 18 – 28 Iqbal Allahabad PCIT-1 vs. M/s ITA The Hon’ble High Court of 29 – 33 Consortium Nussli No.62/2022dated Delhi Comfort Net 24.03.2022 Argument:- Non issuance of notice u/s 143(2) renders the assessment non est PCIT vs. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR 455 The Hon’ble High Court of 34 – 40 (Del) Delhi PCIT-08 Vs. Shri Jai The Hon’ble High Court of 41 – 49 Shiv Shankar Delhi Traders Pvt. Ltd. Argument:- CIT cannot assume jurisdiction over proceedings which does not exist in the eyes of law Keshab Narayan (1998)66 CCH 0874 The Hon’ble High Court of 50 – 57 Banerjee vs. CIT Calcutta Concord Infra (202…

Ajmer Development Authority, Ajmer vs. CIT(Exemption)/ ITO (Exemption), Jaipur / Jodhpur

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 89/JODH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…uashed. Accordingly, the order of the Principal CIT passed under s. 263 is set aside and the same is quashed. —CIT vs. CPR Capital Services Ltd. (2011) 330 ITR 43 (Del), Principal CIT vs. Silver Line (2016) 283 CTR (Del) 148: (2016) 129 DTR (Del) 191 : (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Del) and Westlife Development Ltd. vs. Principal CIT (2016) 49 ITR (Trib) 406 (Mumbai) followed. (Para 6.1)" 9.2.2 The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal CIT vs. Silver Line (2016) 283 CTR (Del) 148: (2016) 129 DTR (Del) 191 (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Del) held that: "Order of reassessment cannot be passed without notice under s. 143(2)…

P M Nargunam, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT Central Circle-6, New Delhi

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

ITA 304/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 304/Del/2020 (A.Y 2014-15) बनाम P M Nargunam, Acit No. 1, Santosh Nagar, Vs. Central Circle-6, Pratap Vihar, New Delhi. Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. Pan No. Aaepn9976E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 131Section 68

…Director of Income Tax Vs. Society for Worldwide Inter Bank Financial, Telecommunications in ITA No. 441/2010, reported at 323 ITR 249 iv) Section 292BB & Section 143(2) are both dealt succinctly in Delhi High Court decision in case of Silver Line reported at 383 ITR 455 wherein it has been held as under:- “...12. The Court first proposes to consider the question as to whether in terms of the proviso to Section 292BB of the Act, the Assessee was precluded, at the stage of the proceedings before the I.T.A.No.304/Del/2020 ITAT, from raising a contention regarding failure of the AO to issue a notice under Section…

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

…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 CIT v. Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd., ITA No. 887/2017 & 888/2017 dt. 24.10.2017, Delhi High Court • Asst. CIT v. Mis. Hotel Blue Moon, [2010] 321 ITR 362 (SC) • Rajender Kumar Sehgal v. ITO, W.P. © 11255…

National Bakery Machine, Meerut vs. ITO, Ward- 2(1), Meerut

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3731/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2009-10] National Bakery Machine, Vs Ito, C/O-B.P.Gupta & Co., Tax Laws Ward-2(1), Consultants, 186, W.K.Road, Meerut. Opp. Nagin Prakashan, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh-250001. Pan-Aaefn1513H Appellant Respondent Appellant By S/Shri K.Sampath & V.Rajakumar, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 22.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.03.2023 Order

Section 143(2)Section 292BSection 69

…ice u/s 143(2).” 4. I have heard Ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties and perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Pr.CIT vs Silver Line [2016] 383 ITR 455 (Delhi) had an occasion to decide the issue related to consequence of non-service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act. Hon’ble Delhi High Court after considering the various judgements on this point held that “With the legal position being abundantly clear that a reassessment order cannot be passed without compliance with the mandatory requirement of…

Sainik Filling Station, Faridabad vs. ITO Ward - 4(1), Gurgaon

Appeal are allowed in the terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 6868/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 40A(3)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI KUL BHARAT, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sainik Filling Station, Vs Income-tax Officer, C/o H. No. 620, Sector-15, Part-1, Ward-4(1), Gurgaon. Gurgaon, Haryana-122001. C/o M/s RRA TaxIndia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi-110049. PAN- ABOFS3734L APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by Dr. Rakesh Gupta Advocate & Sh. Shrey Jain, Advocate Department represented by Sh. Om Parkash, Sr. DR Date of hearing 23.02.2023 Date of pronouncement 27.02.2023 O R D E R PER KUL BHARAT, JM: This appeal, by the assessee, i…

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

…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 notice u/s 143(2) is a basic jurisdictional error and canno…

Sa Syncon Infrastructure Services Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-22(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2040/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Feb 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhrys A Syncon Infrastructure Vs. Acit Services Pvt. Ltd., Circle – 22(2) Flat/Door/Block No. Unit New Delhi No.2934, Plot No.D1/D2, Krish Industrial Estate, Mumbai – 400 705 Pan No. Aajcs 1364 H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Prajnaraj Mohanty, Adv. Revenue By Shri B. M. Singh, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 31.01.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.02.2023 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am : This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.02.2018 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, New Delhi Relating To Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case As Culled Out From The Material On Record Are As Under :-

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

…the notice u/s 143(2) of the Act was never issued or served on the assessee. Revenue has not placed any material on record to controvert the aforesaid submissions of Learned AR. We find that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi) has held that reassessment order cannot be passed without compliance with the mandatory 4 requirement of notice being issued by the Assessing Officer to the assessee u/s 143(2) of the Act. It has held that the requirement of issuance of such notice is a jurisdictional one and it goes to the root of the matter as far as the validity of th…

Shyam Products P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-23(3), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4908/DEL/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Sr. D. R
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 68Section 69C

…matter. The word necessary must be construed in the connection in which it is used. It is further submitted that the above illegality cannot be cured u/s sec 292BB of IT Act as held by the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case PCITv. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Del). In para 17 and 18 of said decision. the Hon I ble court held that the Ld AO has discretion to issue of notice ujs 143(2) of IT Act after examining the return of income filed that prima facie the Assessee has "understated the income rr or has "computed excessive loss" or has "underpaid the tax in any manner" .. Identical view has been held…

Optimist Electronics P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-19(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 4907/DEL/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, S.M.C.

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Sr. D. R
Section 147Section 148Section 271Section 68Section 69C

…matter. The word necessary must be construed in the connection in which it is used. It is further submitted that the above illegality cannot be cured u/s sec 292BB of IT Act as held by the jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case PCITv. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Del). In para 17 and 18 of said decision. the Hon I ble court held that the Ld AO has discretion to issue of notice ujs 143(2) of IT Act after examining the return of income filed that prima facie the Assessee has "understated the income rr or has "computed excessive loss" or has "underpaid the tax in any manner" .. Identical view has been held…

Danone Asia Pte Limited, Singapore vs. ACIT, Int Tax, Circle-1(2)(2), Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed, as indicated above

ITA 376/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 2016-17

Section 143(2)Section 147

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI BENCH: ‘D’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, PRESIDENT AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2016-17 Danone Asia Pte Limited, Vs. ACIT, Int Tax-1 (2)(2), 1 Walich Street, Guoco New Delhi. Tower $ 18-01, Singapore, Singapore, 078881 PAN :AAFCD8967M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Himansu Sinha, Adv. & Vibhu Gupta, CA Respondent by Ms. Anupama Singla, Sr. DR Date of hearing 31.08.2022 Date of pronouncement 29.11.2022 ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: Captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 04.02.20…

Shri Raoof R Dhanani, Mumbai vs. Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Baroda

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on jurisdiction

ITA 3367/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.RFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R
Section 132(1)Section 132(4)Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153B

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “B” BENCH Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice President And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2011-12 Shri Raoof R. Dhanani, The ACIT, 281, 28th Floor, Kalpatur Circle-1(2), Heights, Dr. A.R. Nair Vs Baroda Road, Agripada, (Respondent) Mumbai-400011 PAN: ACTPD1157A (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri Sakar Sharma, A.R. Revenue by: Shri James Kurian, CIT-D.R. Date of hearing : 26-07-2022 Date of pronouncement : 19-10-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld…

Santosh Mahalingam, Ghaziabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-6, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 283/DEL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Tarvinder Singh Kapoor & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg[Assessment Year : 2014-15] Santosh Mahalingam, Vs Acit, No.1, Santosh Nagar, Pratap Central Circle-6, Vihar, Ghaziabad-201009. New Delhi. Pan-Cjkps5766C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.K.Gupta, Ca Respondent By Shri H.K.Choudhary, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 30.06.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 03.08.2022

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

…Director of Income Tax Vs. Society for Worldwide Inter Bank Financial, Telecommunications in ITA No. 441/2010, reported at 323 ITR 249 iv) Section 292BB & Section 143(2) are both dealt succinctly in Delhi High Court decision in case of Silver Line reported at 383 ITR 455 wherein it has been held as under:- 10 | P a g e “…12. The Court first proposes to consider the question as to whether in terms of the proviso to Section 292BB of the Act, the Assessee was precluded, at the stage of the proceedings before the ITAT, from raising a contention regarding failure of the AO to issue a notice under Section 143(2) of th…

Nishit Fincap P. Ltd., Delhi vs. ITO Ward 18(3), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is

ITA 1424/DEL/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda[Assessment Year: 2008-09]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 153(1)Section 153CSection 68

…of 2015, Dated 14/10/2015(Del); iii. Pr CIT vs M/s Paramount Biotech Industries Ltd In ITA No.887, 888/2017 Dated 24.10.2017 (Del); iv. DIT v. Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (2010) 323 ITR 249 (Del); v. PCIT v. Silver Line (2016) 383 ITR 455 (Delhi) (HC) vi. Pr CIT vs Staunch Marketing Pvt Ltd 404 ITR 299 (Del) vii. Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 341 ITR 247 (Del) 13. The ld. Counsel for the assessee in his another plank of argument submitted that the jurisdiction u/s 147 was assumed on the basis of various incriminating documents found in the search on Sh. S.K. Jain an…

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3(2), Hyderabad vs. Indrani Prasad, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 467/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

…sessee that there was no valid service of the notice under Section 148 of the Act would fail particularly having due regard to the provisions of Section. 292 BB of the Act. These facts are clearly distinguishable”. 6.1.4 In the case of Pr. CIT Vs Silver Line 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon'ble High Court held as under: Page 11 of 27 ITA Nos 409 and 467 of 2020 Indrani Prasad New Delhi "The Court first proposes to consider the question as to whether in terms of the proviso to Section 292BB of the Act, the Assessee was precluded, at the stage of the proceedings before the ITAT, from raising a contention regarding…

Indrani Prasad, New Delhi vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-3, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal is treated as allowed”

ITA 409/HYD/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad21 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.M. Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godara

For Appellant: Sri P. Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri K.Madhusudan, CIT(DR)
Section 113Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 158Section 271

…sessee that there was no valid service of the notice under Section 148 of the Act would fail particularly having due regard to the provisions of Section. 292 BB of the Act. These facts are clearly distinguishable”. 6.1.4 In the case of Pr. CIT Vs Silver Line 383 ITR 455 (Delhi), the Hon'ble High Court held as under: Page 11 of 27 ITA Nos 409 and 467 of 2020 Indrani Prasad New Delhi "The Court first proposes to consider the question as to whether in terms of the proviso to Section 292BB of the Act, the Assessee was precluded, at the stage of the proceedings before the ITAT, from raising a contention regarding…

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

…out 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) was not needed as the return was not filed by the assess…

Sanjeev Chandrakant Deo, Mumbai vs. ITO 29 (3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed as indicated above

ITA 2280/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri M. Balaganesh ()

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 282Section 292BSection 4Section 68Section 69B

…/2019 dated 31-01-2020 2. Dnyaneshwar Trading & Investments Pvt Ltd 6807 & 7536/Mum/2016 dt 14th March, 2019 3. Sweet Memories Property Pvt Ltd ITA 4533-4855/Mum/2017 dated 23rd April, 2019 4. Sanjay Badani (2014) 35 ITR (Trib) 536 (Mum) 5. CIT vs Silver Line 383 ITR 455 (Del) – Section 292BB would have no application & cannot cure jurisdictional defect. 6. Without prejudice to the aforesaid submission, learned counsel submitted, though, the AO had alleged that the assessee had not filed any return of income for the impugned assessment year, however, the assessee, in fact, had filed his return of income for the…