Pr. CIT v. Sunrise Finlease P. Ltd.

89 Taxmann.com 1High Court2018#878 most cited
120

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Pr. CIT v. Sunrise Finlease P. Ltd. · Sunrise Finlease P. Ltd. · Section 153A Income Tax Act · Section 132 Income Tax Act · Section 153D Income Tax Act · Search and seizure assessment · Block assessment · Income Tax High Court 2018 · Section 68 cash credits · Validity of assessment procedure · 89 Taxmann.com 1 · 144 ITR 954

Also reported as

144 ITR 954

Sections most often in play

Section 153ASection 132Section 68Section 132ASection 144Section 148Section 124Section 153D

Issues it is cited on

section 10(31a)section 100section 76section 142(2c)section 153b(1)(b)section 115whsection 153b(1)section 115wfrectification under section 154section 144basection 115wdsection 115we

Judgments citing Pr. CIT v. Sunrise Finlease P. Ltd.

DCIT Central Circle, Agra vs. Lt. Shri Mradul Garg, Mathura

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 272/AGR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…before according the request for approval was put up before him at the 11th hour. 2.5 the ld. AR relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in the matter of i. Sahara India (firm) vs CIT (2008) 300 ITR 403 ii. PCIT vs Sunrise Finlease Limited 89 Taxmann.com 1(Gujrat) 6 iii. SmtShreelekhaDamani vs DCIT 173 TTJ 332 iv. Pcit vs SmtShreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297…

Ashok Kumar Agarwal, Mathura vs. DCIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 269/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…before according the request for approval was put up before him at the 11th hour. 2.5 the ld. AR relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in the matter of i. Sahara India (firm) vs CIT (2008) 300 ITR 403 ii. PCIT vs Sunrise Finlease Limited 89 Taxmann.com 1(Gujrat) 6 iii. SmtShreelekhaDamani vs DCIT 173 TTJ 332 iv. Pcit vs SmtShreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297…

D.S. India Jewelmart P Ltd, Mathura vs. ACIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 268/AGR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…before according the request for approval was put up before him at the 11th hour. 2.5 the ld. AR relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in the matter of i. Sahara India (firm) vs CIT (2008) 300 ITR 403 ii. PCIT vs Sunrise Finlease Limited 89 Taxmann.com 1(Gujrat) 6 iii. SmtShreelekhaDamani vs DCIT 173 TTJ 332 iv. Pcit vs SmtShreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297…

Saurabh Agarwal, Mathura vs. DCIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 263/AGR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…before according the request for approval was put up before him at the 11th hour. 2.5 the ld. AR relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in the matter of i. Sahara India (firm) vs CIT (2008) 300 ITR 403 ii. PCIT vs Sunrise Finlease Limited 89 Taxmann.com 1(Gujrat) 6 iii. SmtShreelekhaDamani vs DCIT 173 TTJ 332 iv. Pcit vs SmtShreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297…

Lt. Shri Mradul Garg, Mathura vs. DCIT Central Circle, Agra

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and those of Revenue are

ITA 260/AGR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra18 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: : Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 153D

…before according the request for approval was put up before him at the 11th hour. 2.5 the ld. AR relied upon the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in the matter of i. Sahara India (firm) vs CIT (2008) 300 ITR 403 ii. PCIT vs Sunrise Finlease Limited 89 Taxmann.com 1(Gujrat) 6 iii. SmtShreelekhaDamani vs DCIT 173 TTJ 332 iv. Pcit vs SmtShreelekhaDamani 307 CTR(Bom) 218 v. AAA PAPER MARKETING VS ACIT 2017(4) TMI 1371 vi. Smt Indra Bansal vs ACIT 192 TTJ (JD) 968 vii. Geeta Rani Panda vs ACIT 194 TTJ (CTK) 915 viii. AkilGulamali vs ITO 20 Taxman.com 380 ( para12) ix. Sun engineering (P) Ltd 198 ITR 297…

Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-8(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 633/HYD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyassessment Year: 2009-10 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward – 8(2), Hyderabad. Pan – Acipm 3813 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Vikash Modi Revenue By: Smt. V. Aparna Date Of Hearing: 04/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/08/2019 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This Is An Appeal Of The Assessee For The Ay 2009-10 Against The Order Of Cit(A) – 8, Hyderabad, Dated, 16/02/2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Had Sold A Property Situated At Kondapur Grampanchayat, Serilingampally Mandal, Rr District Vide Sale Deed No. 4100/2008 Dated 5Th June, 2008 For A Consideration Of Rs. 15,48,000/-, Whereas The Guideline Value Of The Property As Adopted By The Stamp Valuation Authority Was Rs. 50,56,000/-. Since The Assessee Did Not Offer Any Capital Gains On This Transaction To Tax, Ao Initiated Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act By Issuing A Notice U/S 148 On 24/03/2016, Which Was Served On The Assessee By Way Of Affixture At The Last Known Address & Thereafter Notice U/S 142(1) Was Also Issued On 09/05/2016. Since There Was No Reply From The Assessee, A 2 I.T.A. No. 633/Hyd/18 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyd..

For Appellant: Shri Vikash ModiFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)Section 50C

…on-service of notice is a jurisdictional defect and cannot be cured by Section 292B of the Act, the Ld. 11 I.T.A. No. 633/Hyd/18 Shiv Kumar Mittal, Hyd.. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance upon the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi [144 ITR 954] (All); ii. PN Sasikumar and others Vs. CIT [170 ITR 80] (Ker); iii. CIT Vs. Shital Prasad Karag Prasad [280 ITR 541] (All); iv. CIT Vs. Norton Motors [275 ITR 595] (P&H) 4. Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below to submit that the department has taken steps to serve the notice on the assessee and since the notic…

Sajan Kumar Jain, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5949/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .Nos.-5949 to 5951/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 to 2015-16) Sajan Kumar Jain vs DCIT 1443, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. ACSPJ6904A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-5945 & 5946/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2014-15 & 2015-16) Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) vs DCIT 672, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AAGHA8277F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-4723, 5947 & 5948Del/2018 (ASSESSM…

Anand Kumar Jain, Faridabad vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4723/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .Nos.-5949 to 5951/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 to 2015-16) Sajan Kumar Jain vs DCIT 1443, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. ACSPJ6904A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-5945 & 5946/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2014-15 & 2015-16) Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) vs DCIT 672, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AAGHA8277F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-4723, 5947 & 5948Del/2018 (ASSESSM…

Satish Dev Jain, Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5955/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .Nos.-5949 to 5951/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 to 2015-16) Sajan Kumar Jain vs DCIT 1443, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. ACSPJ6904A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-5945 & 5946/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2014-15 & 2015-16) Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) vs DCIT 672, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AAGHA8277F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-4723, 5947 & 5948Del/2018 (ASSESSM…

Anand Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5948/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .Nos.-5949 to 5951/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 to 2015-16) Sajan Kumar Jain vs DCIT 1443, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. ACSPJ6904A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-5945 & 5946/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2014-15 & 2015-16) Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) vs DCIT 672, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AAGHA8277F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-4723, 5947 & 5948Del/2018 (ASSESSM…

Anand Kumar Jain, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5947/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .Nos.-5949 to 5951/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 to 2015-16) Sajan Kumar Jain vs DCIT 1443, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. ACSPJ6904A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-5945 & 5946/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2014-15 & 2015-16) Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) vs DCIT 672, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AAGHA8277F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-4723, 5947 & 5948Del/2018 (ASSESSM…

Anand Jain HUF, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5946/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .Nos.-5949 to 5951/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 to 2015-16) Sajan Kumar Jain vs DCIT 1443, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. ACSPJ6904A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-5945 & 5946/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2014-15 & 2015-16) Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) vs DCIT 672, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AAGHA8277F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-4723, 5947 & 5948Del/2018 (ASSESSM…

Anand Jain HUF, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5945/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri B.R.R. Kumar

Section 127Section 132Section 153ASection 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘G’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A .Nos.-5949 to 5951/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2013-14 to 2015-16) Sajan Kumar Jain vs DCIT 1443, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. ACSPJ6904A (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-5945 & 5946/Del/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEARS- 2014-15 & 2015-16) Anand Kumar Jain (HUF) vs DCIT 672, Sector-14, Faridabad, Central Circle 25, Haryana. New Delhi. PAN No. AAGHA8277F (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A .Nos.-4723, 5947 & 5948Del/2018 (ASSESSM…

Payal Jindal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 57/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Toshniwala, ARFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292BSection 50C

…lso invalid. In support of his contentions that - non-service of notice is a jurisdictional defect and cannot be cured by Section 292B of the Act, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance upon the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi [144 ITR 954] (All); ii. PN Sasikumar and others Vs. CIT [170 ITR 80] (Ker); iii. CIT Vs. Shital Prasad Karag Prasad [280 ITR 541] (All); iv. CIT Vs. Norton Motors [275 ITR 595] (P&H) 4. Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below to submit that the department has taken steps to serve the notice on the assessee and since the noti…

Rajkumar Jindal, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeals of both the assessees are allowed

ITA 56/HYD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad03 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Siddharth Toshniwala, ARFor Respondent: Smt. V. Aparna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 292BSection 50C

…lso invalid. In support of his contentions that - non-service of notice is a jurisdictional defect and cannot be cured by Section 292B of the Act, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance upon the following decisions: i. CIT Vs. Smt. Phoolmati Devi [144 ITR 954] (All); ii. PN Sasikumar and others Vs. CIT [170 ITR 80] (Ker); iii. CIT Vs. Shital Prasad Karag Prasad [280 ITR 541] (All); iv. CIT Vs. Norton Motors [275 ITR 595] (P&H) 4. Ld. DR, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below to submit that the department has taken steps to serve the notice on the assessee and since the noti…

DCIT, Jaipur vs. Siyaram Exports India Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 136/JPR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jun 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) &For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (JCIT)
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 68

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 136/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2009-10 cuke The ACIT, M/s Siyaram Exports India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Central Circle-3, 18, Siyaram Street, Tonk Road, Jaipur. Durgapura, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAKCS 1420 R vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Rajeev Sogani (CA) & Shri Rohan Sog…

Shri Mahesh D. Gupta, Nagpur vs. ACIT-Central-Circle-2(3), Nagpur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 183/NAG/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Mar 2019AY 2004-05
For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Loya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT
Section 131Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ukxiqj "यायपीठ, ukxiqj म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR "ी डी. क"णाकरा राव, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी िवकास अव"थी, "याियक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.183/NAG/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2004–05 Mahesh D. Gupta, C/o. M/s Loya Bagri & Co., Chartered Accountants, Gandhibag, Nagpur–440002. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant PAN : AATPG8810F बनाम / V/s. ACIT, Central Circle–2(3), ……""यथ" / Respondent Nagpur. Assessee by : Shri Rajesh Loya, Adv. Revenue by : Shri U. U. Kasar, Jt.CIT सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hea…

The Commissioner of Incomet Tax vs. Khatri Hotels Pvt Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 1323 / 2008HC Delhi15 Apr 2009
Section 143Section 158

…manner prescribed could be fatal to its validity. For this proposition he placed reliance on the case of *Dr. Nalini Mahajan and Others v. Director of Income-tax (Inv.) & Others:*257 ITR 123 (Del) as also on *Commissioner of Income-tax v. Smt Phoolmati Devi:* 144 ITR 954 (All). ! - 25. Mr. Aggarwal summed up his arguments by submitting that the proviso to section 143(2) was applicable to chapter XIV B proceedings. Since section 143(2) was a condition precedent for a regular assessment under section 143 (3) it was equally so for computing undisclosed income. - 26. Mr. Ashwini Taneja, advocate, appearing for the…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta

The appeals are dismissed

ITA - 200 / 2008HC Delhi15 Apr 2009
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 158

…anner prescribed could be fatal to its validity. For this proposition he placed reliance on the case of Dr. Nalini Mahajan and Others v. Director of Income-tax (Inv.) & Others: 257 ITR 123 (Del) as also on Commissioner of Income-tax v. Smt Phoolmati Devi: 144 ITR 954 (All). 25. Mr. Aggarwal summed up his arguments by submitting that the proviso to section 143(2) was applicable to chapter XIV B proceedings. Since section 143(2) was a condition precedent for a regular assessment under section 143 (3) it was equally so for computing undisclosed income. 26. Mr. Ashwini Taneja, advocate, appearing for t…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/200/2008HC Delhi15 Apr 2009
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 158

…anner prescribed could be fatal to its validity. For this proposition he placed reliance on the case of Dr. Nalini Mahajan and Others v. Director of Income-tax (Inv.) & Others: 257 ITR 123 (Del) as also on Commissioner of Income-tax v. Smt Phoolmati Devi: 144 ITR 954 (All). 25. Mr. Aggarwal summed up his arguments by submitting that the proviso to section 143(2) was applicable to chapter XIV B proceedings. Since section 143(2) was a condition precedent for a regular assessment under section 143 (3) it was equally so for computing undisclosed income. 26. Mr. Ashwini Taneja, advocate, appearing for t…