R Dalmia v. CIT

236 ITR 480Supreme Court of India1999#3086 most cited

What is R Dalmia v. CIT authority for?

When a return is filed under section 148, the assessment and reassessment under section 147 must follow the procedural provisions subsequent to section 139 of the Income Tax Act.

38

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2025.

Also referred to as

R Dalmia v. CIT · section 148 · section 147 · section 139 · assessment procedure · reassessment procedure · so far as may be

Sections most often in play

Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 12AASection 143(3)Section 145Section 263Section 36(1)(iv)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

recognised provident fundapproved superannuation fundsection 140a(1)section 11 exemptionsection 80j(6a)section 150(2)section 12a(b)section 10(22)approved gratuity fundsection 36(1)(v)section 139(4a)section 10(20)

Judgments citing R Dalmia v. CIT

O.P.Yadav, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circ Le-15, New Delhi

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

ITA 5523/DEL/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Sept 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kant

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 158B

…ws: This section imposes no charge on the subject but deals merely with the machinery of assessment, Bhimraj v CIT 32 ITR 289, affirmed in 41 ITR 221 (SC); Radhakant v. Johri 39 ITR 182; Chhaganlal v ITO 46 ITR 351, 357; Dalmia v CIT 194 ITR 700, affirmed in 236 ITR 480 (SC) on another issue; CIT v Saraf 207 ITR 217; Sardar Harvinder v ACIT 227 ITR 512; and in interpreting provisions of this kind the rule is that that construction should be preferred which makes the machinery workable.CIT v Mahaliram 8 ITR 442, 448 (PC); CIT v Sun Engg. Works 198 ITR 297 (SC); and s.1 under Interpretation of the Income Tax Act;…

Kamla Craft Pack Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 810/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.810/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 Kamla Craft Pack Pvt. Ltd., I.T.O, 5, Vasukanan, Nr. Lotus Flats, Vs. Ward-2(1)(2), Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad-38001. Pan: Aaack7985K

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goel, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292BSection 68

…ch return were a return required to be furnished under section 139 :] 9.2 We further note that the expression used under section 148 of the Act i.e. “so for as may be” has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of R Dalmia Vs. CIT reported in 236 ITR 480, that once the return filed under section 148 of the Act then in making the assessment and the reassessment under section 147 of the Act the provisions subsequent to the provision of section 139 of the Act has to be followed. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced as under: “It is no doubt that assessments under section 143 and assess…

Kirti Milex Limited, Ahmedabad vs. ITO, Ward-2(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 686/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.686/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2008-2009 M/S. Kirti Milex Ltd., I.T.O, 5, Vasukanan, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Ward-2(1)(2), Nr.Lotus Flats, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri N.K. Goel, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 292BSection 68

…ch return were a return required to be furnished under section 139 :] 9.2 We further note that the expression used under section 148 of the Act i.e. “so for as may be” has been interpreted by the Hon’ble Apex court in the case of R Dalmia Vs. CIT reported in 236 ITR 480, that once the return filed under section 148 of the Act then in making the assessment and the reassessment under section 147 of the Act the provisions subsequent to the provision of section 139 of the Act has to be followed. The relevant extract of the judgment is reproduced as under: “It is no doubt that assessments under section 143 and assess…

Visa Chemical Industries, Thane vs. ACIT Circle -3, Thane

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3902/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri M. Subramanian, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Chaitnya Anjania, ld.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…no reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee. The ITAT, after relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in R. Dalmia v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480/102 Taxman 702, came to the conclusion that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory. The ITAT has taken into consideration the relevant provisions and has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court and relying on the said judgments, the ITAT has held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory and in the absence…

Shumbhlaxmi Dyetex P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 3256/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Ld. Cit(A). Thus Assessee Request To Raise This Legal Point As Additional Ground.

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFOREHON’BLE SH. SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM& HON’BLE SH.RAMIT KOCHAR, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 3256/Mum/2017 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2007-08) ACIT Cen Cir 3(3) ShubhlaxmiDyetex Pvt. R. No. 401, Aayakar Ltd. Bhavan, Mumbai-400020 401/A, Oberoi Chambers, बिधम/ New Link Road, Opp- Vs. SAB TV office, Andheri(W), Mumbai-400 053 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ PAN No. AADCS3613D (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant Ms. HemaKataria,AR : by प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondentby : Shri Ajay Pratap Singh, DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 27.06.2019 Date of Hea…

ITO, Ward- 41(1), New Delhi vs. Aastha Goel, New Delhi

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 6005/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year : 2014-15 Ito, Ward- 41(1), Aastha Goel, New Delhi. 28/42, West Punjabi Bagh, Vs. New Delhi.

For Appellant: Mrs. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri N. K. Bansal, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 56(2)(vii)Section 80CSection 80T

…at the expression "so far as may be" as per the proviso to section 56(2)(vii) has always been construed to mean that those provisions may generally be followed to the extent possible. Reference is sought to be made to the judgment of R. Dalmia and Ors. v. CIT 236 ITR 480 (SC), for the proposition that the expression "so far as may be" applies to all the provisions. (i) That this provision has employed the word "shall". By use of the word "shall", the provision has been made mandatory and it cannot be construed as directory. (ii) What has been made applicable by this provision is the provision of this Act." (iii)…

Sudhir Menon, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1744/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1744/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Shri Sudhir Menon The Asst. Commissioner Of 501, Swapnalok, Marve Road, Income Tax, Central Circle- Malad (West), 8(2), 676A, 6Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 064 Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- 400 020 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aajpm4604R Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1466/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Asst. Commissioner Of Sudhir Menon Income Tax, Central Circle- 501, Swapnalok, Marve Vs. 8(2), 676A, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Road, Malad (West), Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 064 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : S/Shri Se Dastur, Hiten Chande Ars’ प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Cit Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 03-10-2018 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03-10-2018

For Appellant: S/Shri SE DasturFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…no reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee. The ITAT, after relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in R. Dalmia v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480/102 Taxman 702, came to the conclusion that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory. The ITAT has taken into consideration the relevant provisions and has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court and relying on the said judgments, the ITAT has held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory and in the absence…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 8(2), Mumbai vs. Sudhir Maenon, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed and that of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1466/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1744/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Shri Sudhir Menon The Asst. Commissioner Of 501, Swapnalok, Marve Road, Income Tax, Central Circle- Malad (West), 8(2), 676A, 6Th Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 064 Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- 400 020 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aajpm4604R Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1466/Mum/2016 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Asst. Commissioner Of Sudhir Menon Income Tax, Central Circle- 501, Swapnalok, Marve Vs. 8(2), 676A, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Road, Malad (West), Bhavan, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 064 .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : S/Shri Se Dastur, Hiten Chande Ars’ प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, Cit Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 03-10-2018 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03-10-2018

For Appellant: S/Shri SE DasturFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…no reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee. The ITAT, after relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in R. Dalmia v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480/102 Taxman 702, came to the conclusion that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory. The ITAT has taken into consideration the relevant provisions and has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court and relying on the said judgments, the ITAT has held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory and in the absence…

DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Manz Retail P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 5766/MUM/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. C. Sharma, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.5766/Mum/2015 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2004-05) बिधम/ Dcit-10(2)(2) M/S. Manz Retail Private Room No. 216-A, Aayakar Limited, Knowledge House, Vs. Bhavan, M.K. Road, Off. Jogeshwari Vikhroli Mumbai-400020. Link Road, Shyam Nagar, Jogeshwari (E), Mumbai- 400060 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaccm1978J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Ms. Dinkle Hariya (Ar) Revenue By: Shri T. A. Khan (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22.03.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.05.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 11.09.2015 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2004-05 In Which The Penalty Levied By The Ao Has Been Ordered To Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Hariya (AR)For Respondent: Shri T. A. Khan (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271USection 271U(1)(c)

…no reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee. The ITAT, after relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in R. Dalmia v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480/102 Taxman 702, came to the conclusion that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory. The ITAT has taken into consideration the relevant provisions and has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court and relying on the said judgments, the ITAT has held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory and in the absence…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S. Kirti Solvex Ltd

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1501/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Jan 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Modi
Section 132Section 142ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…Bombay High Court, admittedly, no notice under section 143(2) of the Act had been issued while making the assessment under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act. The Tribunal in the said case had relied on the judgment of Apex Court in R. Dalmia Vs. CIT (1999) 236 ITR 480 (SC) to conclude that the issue of notice under section 143(2) of the Act was mandatory. The Tribunal following the said judgment of the Apex Court had held that the notice under section 143(2) of the Act was mandatory and in the absence of said service, the Assessing Officer could not proceed to make an enquiry on the return filed in compliance…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Dimension Promoters Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 1105/DEL/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jan 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu. & Shri T.S. Kapoor

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

…are as under : (i). ACIT & Anr. Vs. Hotel Blue Moon, 321 ITR 362(SC) (ii). Directorate of Income Tax vs. VR Educational Trust, 2013(12) TMI 745 (Delhi High Court) (iii). Alpine Electronics Asia Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DGIT, 341 ITR 247 (Del.) (iv). Dalmia (R) vs. CIT, 236 ITR 480 (SC) (v). CIT vs. Pawan Gupta, 318 ITR 322 (Del.) (vi). DCIT vs. M/s. Silver Line 2014(10) TMI 141 ITAT Delhi (vii). CIT vs. Rajeev Sharma, 336 ITR 247 (Del.) (viii). ITO vs. Smt Sukhini P. Modi, 295 ITR (AT) 169 (Ahmedabad Bench) (ix). UKT Software Technologies Pvt Ltd vs. ITO, 2013 (1) TM 1678- ITAT Delhi. (x). CIT vs. Mukesh Kumar Aggarwal, 34…

Siya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 865/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Dec 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. N. K. Sainiita No. 865/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Siya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., Vs Income Tax Officer, Up-12, Pitampura, Ward-8(4), New Delhi-110034 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaics7889N Assessee By : Smt. Rano Jain, Adv. & Sh. Ashish Chadha, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.12.2017 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 21.12.2012 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Xi, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Smt. Rano Jain, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…ns Investments Private Limited (2007) 107 ITD 457 (Cehnnai) " ACIT VS Santosh Kumar & Ors (2003) 87 ITD 107 (AH) " CIT VS PAwan Gupta & Ors (2009) 22 DTR 291 (Del) " CWT Vs HUF of H.H.Late Shri J.M. Scindia (2008) 300 ITR 193 (Bom) " R Dalmia & Another VS CIT 236 ITR 480 (SC) 6 Siya Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. 7. It was further submitted that the assessee did not receive any sum on any account from M/s Thar Steel Pvt. Ltd. during the year under consideration. Therefore, the addition made by the AO alongwith reason recorded were bad in law and against the case of the assessee and that the addition of Rs.5,00,000/- was…

Menz Retail P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3889/MUM/2012[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Nov 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2004-05 M/S. Menz Retail Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, 8(2), Ground Floor, R.N.216-A, Knowledge House, Aayakar Bhavan, Off. Jogeshwari-Vikroli M.K. Road, Vs. Link Rd., Mumbai - 60 Shyam Nagar, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai – 400 060 Pan: Aaacm1978J (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Ms. Dinkle Haria, C.A. Revenue By : Shri Suman Kumar, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 15.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms. Dinkle Haria, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Suman Kumar, D.R
Section 142Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the 8 M/s. Menz Retail Pvt. Ltd. tax liability of an assessee. The ITAT, after relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in R. Dalmia v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480/102 Taxman 702, came to the conclusion that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory. The ITAT has taken into consideration the relevant provisions and has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court and relying on the said judgments, the ITAT has held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory and in the absence…

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

…n this regard, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on the following decisions. 1. ACIT vs. Geno Pharmaceuticals Ltd (2013) 214 Taxman 83 (Bom) 2. Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. HUF of H.H. Late J.M. Scindia (2008) 300 ITR 193 (Bom.) 3. R. Dalmia vs. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480 4. CIT vs. Mr. Salman Khan (ITA (L) No. 2363 of 2009, dt 1.12.2009) 5. ACIT vs. Hotel Blue Moon [2010] 321 ITR 362 (SC) 7. Further, in response to the Ld DR‟s argument for the defects, if any, in issuance and service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act, are curable b the provisions of section 292BB of the Act, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought our…

DCIT 5(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Hardcastle Petrofer P.Lt, Mumbai

In the result, C.O. filed by the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 182/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma & Shri Pawan Singh

For Respondent: Shri K.C.Kanojia (DR)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 17Section 253Section 80I

…o reason why such a question should not be allowed to be raised when it is necessary to consider that question in order to correctly assess the tax liability of an assessee. The I TAT, after relying on the judgment of the Apex Court in R. Dalmia v. CIT [1999] 236 ITR 480/ 102 Taxman 702, came to the conclusion that issuance of notice under Section 143(2) was mandatory. The ITAT has taken into consideration the relevant provisions and has also taken into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court and relying on the said judgments, the ITAT has held that notice under Section 143(2) is mandatory and in the absence…

The Commissioner of Incomet Tax vs. Khatri Hotels Pvt Ltd

The appeals are dismissed

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

…notice under section 158 BC, the assessing officer cannot determine undisclosed income contrary to the return unless a notice under section 143 (2) is issued. The learned counsel made a reference to the Supreme Court decision in the case of *R Dalmia v. CIT*: 236 ITR 480. He submitted that although that decision pertained to the provisions of section 148, the ratio would be applicable to block proceedings also. A reference was also made to the Bombay High Court decision in the case of *CWT v. HUF of JM Scindia*: 17 (1) of the Wealth Tax Act, the expression employed was "and the provisions of this act shall so fa…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta

The appeals are dismissed

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

…otice under section 158 BC, the assessing officer cannot determine undisclosed income contrary to the return unless a notice under section 143 (2) is issued. The learned counsel made a reference to the Supreme Court decision in the case of R Dalmia v. CIT: 236 ITR 480. He submitted that although that decision pertained to the provisions of section 148, the ratio would be applicable to block proceedings also. A reference was also made to the Bombay High Court decision in the case of CWT v. HUF of JM Scindia: 2009:DHC:1436-DB 17 (1) of the Wealth Tax Act, the expression employed was "and the provisions…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Pawan Gupta

The appeals are dismissed

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

…otice under section 158 BC, the assessing officer cannot determine undisclosed income contrary to the return unless a notice under section 143 (2) is issued. The learned counsel made a reference to the Supreme Court decision in the case of R Dalmia v. CIT: 236 ITR 480. He submitted that although that decision pertained to the provisions of section 148, the ratio would be applicable to block proceedings also. A reference was also made to the Bombay High Court decision in the case of CWT v. HUF of JM Scindia: 2009:DHC:1436-DB 17 (1) of the Wealth Tax Act, the expression employed was "and the provisions…