Riknu R. Rai v. ITO

454 ITR 33High Court2023#12859 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148Section 143(3)Section 115BBESection 131Section 132Section 139(1)Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

legal representativesection 145(3)faceless assessmentdocuments seizedregular assessmentfinal assessment orderdraft assessment ordersection 132(4)section 131unexplained investmentsection 115bbesection 144b

Judgments citing Riknu R. Rai v. ITO

PALANISAMY SHANKARGANESH,ERODE vs. ITO WARD 1,(1), ERODE

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

ITA 3544/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3544/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shri Palanisamy Shankarganesh The Income Tax Officer, Prop: Universal Communication, Vs. Ward-1(1), No.56, Mettur Road, Erode, Erode. Tamil Nadu-638 001. [Pan: Azsps4331D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr.Bhupendran, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Mr.Sbr Kumar Laghimsetti, Addl.Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 20.01.2026 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2026

For Appellant: Mr.Bhupendran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.SBR Kumar Laghimsetti
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151

…Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Core Logistic :- 7 -: Company (supra) And also the Hon’ble High Court of Telangana in the case of Deloittee Consulting India (P.) Ltd., (supra) and the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Rinku R. Rai vs. ITO, 454 ITR 33 (Bom). The relevant finding of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Core Logistic Company (supra) reads as follows:- “9. A perusal of Section 151(i) would show that, the specified authority for the purpose of issuing notice under Section 148 within a period of three years from the end of the relevant assessment year is, the Princip…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MORADABAD vs. SWATI MENTHOL AND ALLIED CHEMICALS LIMITED, RAMPUR

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

ITA 5090/DEL/2024[2015]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Nov 2025

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri K.V.S.R. Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manish Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 234BSection 68

…u/s 151 of the Act should have been obtained from the PCIT instead of the Addl. CIT. 9. The assessee relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO Vs. Rinku R. Rai 454 ITR 35 which dismissed the SLP against the Bombay High Court 454 ITR 33 wherein it was held that in reassessment proceedings after four years, sanction of Addl. Page 4 of 7 ITA No. 5090/DEL/2024 & CO No. 23/DEL/2025 [A.Y. 2015-16] Swati Menthol and Allied Chemicals Commissioner is not valid and necessary sanction/approval should have been obtained from the PCIT instead of Addl. CIT. 10. Per contra, the Revenue is…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHAIKH WIFE & LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 873/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

…Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 679/Ahd/2025. 5.1. Regarding Ground Nos. 1 & 2 that no draft assessment order u/s. 144B(1)(xii)(b) of the Act was passed by the A.O. and reliance of Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Riknu R. Rai vs. ITO reported in [2023] 454 ITR 33 (Bom) for the proposition that the final assessment order is liable to be quashed, as no draft assessment order was issued to the assessee. 5.2. In our considered view, the above provisions is not applicable to the facts of the present case, since the provisions of section 144B namely “faceless assessment” is not done in the case of the ITA Nos.…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHAIKH WIFE & LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 872/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

…Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 679/Ahd/2025. 5.1. Regarding Ground Nos. 1 & 2 that no draft assessment order u/s. 144B(1)(xii)(b) of the Act was passed by the A.O. and reliance of Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Riknu R. Rai vs. ITO reported in [2023] 454 ITR 33 (Bom) for the proposition that the final assessment order is liable to be quashed, as no draft assessment order was issued to the assessee. 5.2. In our considered view, the above provisions is not applicable to the facts of the present case, since the provisions of section 144B namely “faceless assessment” is not done in the case of the ITA Nos.…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD, AHMEDABAD vs. FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHAIKH WIFE & LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHAIKH, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 871/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

…Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 679/Ahd/2025. 5.1. Regarding Ground Nos. 1 & 2 that no draft assessment order u/s. 144B(1)(xii)(b) of the Act was passed by the A.O. and reliance of Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Riknu R. Rai vs. ITO reported in [2023] 454 ITR 33 (Bom) for the proposition that the final assessment order is liable to be quashed, as no draft assessment order was issued to the assessee. 5.2. In our considered view, the above provisions is not applicable to the facts of the present case, since the provisions of section 144B namely “faceless assessment” is not done in the case of the ITA Nos.…

FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHEIKH LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHEIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 681/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

…Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 679/Ahd/2025. 5.1. Regarding Ground Nos. 1 & 2 that no draft assessment order u/s. 144B(1)(xii)(b) of the Act was passed by the A.O. and reliance of Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Riknu R. Rai vs. ITO reported in [2023] 454 ITR 33 (Bom) for the proposition that the final assessment order is liable to be quashed, as no draft assessment order was issued to the assessee. 5.2. In our considered view, the above provisions is not applicable to the facts of the present case, since the provisions of section 144B namely “faceless assessment” is not done in the case of the ITA Nos.…

FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHEIK LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHEIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 680/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

…Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 679/Ahd/2025. 5.1. Regarding Ground Nos. 1 & 2 that no draft assessment order u/s. 144B(1)(xii)(b) of the Act was passed by the A.O. and reliance of Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Riknu R. Rai vs. ITO reported in [2023] 454 ITR 33 (Bom) for the proposition that the final assessment order is liable to be quashed, as no draft assessment order was issued to the assessee. 5.2. In our considered view, the above provisions is not applicable to the facts of the present case, since the provisions of section 144B namely “faceless assessment” is not done in the case of the ITA Nos.…

FARIDABANU FARIDMIYA SHEIKH LEGAL HEIR OF LATE FARIDMIYA HUSSENMIYA SHEIKH,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 679/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 148Section 69A

…Assessee’s appeal in ITA No. 679/Ahd/2025. 5.1. Regarding Ground Nos. 1 & 2 that no draft assessment order u/s. 144B(1)(xii)(b) of the Act was passed by the A.O. and reliance of Bombay High Court judgment in the case of Riknu R. Rai vs. ITO reported in [2023] 454 ITR 33 (Bom) for the proposition that the final assessment order is liable to be quashed, as no draft assessment order was issued to the assessee. 5.2. In our considered view, the above provisions is not applicable to the facts of the present case, since the provisions of section 144B namely “faceless assessment” is not done in the case of the ITA Nos.…

Riknu R. Rai v. ITO (454 ITR 33) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax