Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer

176 ITR 352High Court1989#3081 most cited

What is Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer authority for?

An Assessing Officer's assumption of jurisdiction under Section 147 is invalid if the officer does not independently apply their mind but merely acts at the behest of a superior authority. The satisfaction recorded must be independent, not borrowed or dictated.

38

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2024.

Also referred to as

Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO · Section 147 · independent satisfaction · borrowed satisfaction · dictated satisfaction · non-application of mind · assumption of jurisdiction

Also reported as

45 Taxmann 213

Sections most often in play

Section 142(2A)Section 142(2C)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 153Section 153(1)Section 147Section 148

Issues it is cited on

section 147(1)section 116within four yearssection 151(1)beyond four yearssection 151(2)section 10bsection 149(1)(b)section 149(1)tangible materialescapement of incomesection 151

Judgments citing Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer

DCIT CIRCLE-19(1), NEW DELHI vs. PATANJALI AYURVED LTD, NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed and CO, stand infructuous

ITA 1990/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.1988 To 1990/Del/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2012-13 Dcit, Vs Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Circle-19(1), 19, Rajendra Park, New Delhi. D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C Co Nos.84 & 85/Del/2023 (Ita No.1989 & 1990/Del/2020) Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 19, Rajendra Park, Circle-19(1), D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, New Delhi Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate & Shri Gaurav Sachdeva, Ca Revenue By : Shri Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.12.2024 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(3)

…dependent mind to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be "independent" and not "borrowed" or "dictated" satisfaction. Law in this regard is now sell-settled. In Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO [1989] 176 ITR 352/45 Taxman 213 (Pat.), it was held: "Where the Assessing Officer does not himself exercise his jurisdiction under Section 147 but merely acts at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that assumption of jurisdiction was bad for non-satisfaction of the condition precedent." 6.6 Then ld, CIT(A) has relied the jurisdictional ITAT deci…

DCIT CIRCLE-19(1), NEW DELHI vs. PATANJALI AYURVED LTD, NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed and CO, stand infructuous

ITA 1988/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharmaitas No.1988 To 1990/Del/2020 Assessment Years: 2010-11 To 2012-13 Dcit, Vs Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Circle-19(1), 19, Rajendra Park, New Delhi. D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C Co Nos.84 & 85/Del/2023 (Ita No.1989 & 1990/Del/2020) Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Patanjali Ayurved Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 19, Rajendra Park, Circle-19(1), D-26, Kapashera Pushpanjali, New Delhi Delhi – 110 060. Pan: Aaecp4424C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate & Shri Gaurav Sachdeva, Ca Revenue By : Shri Javed Akhtar, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.12.2024 Order

For Appellant: Shri S.S. Nagar, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Javed Akhtar, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(3)

…dependent mind to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be "independent" and not "borrowed" or "dictated" satisfaction. Law in this regard is now sell-settled. In Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. ITO [1989] 176 ITR 352/45 Taxman 213 (Pat.), it was held: "Where the Assessing Officer does not himself exercise his jurisdiction under Section 147 but merely acts at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that assumption of jurisdiction was bad for non-satisfaction of the condition precedent." 6.6 Then ld, CIT(A) has relied the jurisdictional ITAT deci…

ACIT, CENTRAL CRCLE-18, NEW DELHI vs. SHIMMER DEVELOPERS P.LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1497/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 147Section 150Section 68

…in this regard is being placed, among others, on the following judgments: (amna Lal Kabra Vs. ITO 69 ITR 461 (All), Equitable Investment Co. P. Ltd. Vs. ITO 174 ITR 714 (Cal), Baldev Singh Giane Vs. CIT 248 ITR 266 (P&H), Sheo Narain Jaiswal & Others Vs. ITO 176 ITR 352 (369), CIT Vs. Aggarwalla Brothers 189 ITR 786 (Pat), Girdhar Gopal Gulati Vs. UOI 182 Taxation 616 (All), Banswara Syntex Ltd. Vs. ACIT 182 Taxation 584 (Raj). In case the reasons recorded are cryptic the reassessment order passed in pursuance thereof is also bad in law." The fact of non application of mind by the AO in recording of reasons is e…

SS PULSES MANUFACTURING PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9388/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ashwini Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jeetender Chand, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153CSection 250(6)

…endent mind to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be "independent" and not "borrowed" or "dictated" satisfaction”. 12.9. The Hon’ble Patna High court in the case of Shiv Naryan Jaiswal vs., ITO 176 ITR 352 (Patna) has held that where the A.O. does not himself exercise his jurisdiction under section 147, but, merely acts at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that assumption of jurisdiction was bad for non-satisfaction of the condition precedent. I.T.A. No.9388/Del/2019 17 12.10. The Apex Court in the case of Anirudh Sinhji Karan…

EVEREST ORGANICS LTD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF I.T., HYDERABAD

ITTA/9/2005HC Telangana21 Sept 2022

Bench: C.V. BHASKAR REDDY,UJJAL BHUYAN

Section 143(1)(a)

…f NCT & Anr. v Sanjeev Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7 (1970) 1 SCC 795 : (1970) 77 ITR 6 8 AIR 1970 SC 1896 9 (1989) 2 SCC 505 10 AIR 2005 SC 2080 11 137 ITR 605 (Del) 12 ITO 176 ITR 352 17 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters CIT13, CIT v T.R. Rajkumari14, Rajputana Mining Agencies v ITO15, and Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v ACIT16. 7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record. 8. The assessment was of the year 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991- 92 and 1992-93. The return…

RAGHAV SOFTECH PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 20(4), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7127/DEL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Raghav Softech Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ito Vardhman Grand Plaza, Manglam Ward-20(4) Place, Sector-3, Rohini, New Delhi New Delhi Aaecr2527G Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 18.01.2022

Section 147Section 148Section 69

…. Assessing Officer has relied completely on the information sent by the ITO (HQ) (1 & C1), Lucknow, He has not formed his own belief for the issue of notice (as held by Ranchi bench of the High court of Patna In the case of Jaiswal & others Vs. TTO & others (176 ITR 352) which is very important The information contained in the letter is very limited & does not detail the exact nature of the transactions & nature of The escapement of the income. Similarly in case of CIT v. Atul Jain (2007) 164 Taxman 33 (Delhi) It’ was held that merely because some intra- departmental information was received by assessing office…

NEELACHAL I.NIGAM L. vs. ASST.COMNR.OF I.TAX

ITA/8/2005HC Orissa17 Nov 2021

Bench: DR. JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR (CJ),MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR MOHAPATRA

Section 143(1)(a)

…f NCT & Anr. v Sanjeev Bittoo10, Jawahar Lal v Competent Authority, Range-II, New Delhi11 Sheo Narain Jaiswal v ITO12,Yashwant Talkies v 7 (1970) 1 SCC 795 : (1970) 77 ITR 6 8 AIR 1970 SC 1896 9 (1989) 2 SCC 505 10 AIR 2005 SC 2080 11 137 ITR 605 (Del) 12 ITO 176 ITR 352 17 ITA No.6 of 2005 & other connected matters CIT13, CIT v T.R. Rajkumari14, Rajputana Mining Agencies v ITO15, and Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. v ACIT16. 7. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record. 8. The assessment was of the year 1988-89, 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991- 92 and 1992-93. The return…

SUNITA MADHOK ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 555/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 234BSection 69

…es not form, his own belief but merely act at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 148 was bad for non- satisfaction of the conditions precedent [Sheo Narain Jaswal & Ors. v. ITO & Ors. [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Pat.); TC 51R 432.. See also Vishal Swamp Agrawilla v. ITO [1976] CTR (Cal.) 296: TC 51R 432A and Chunnilal Onkarmal (Pvt) Ltd., (1983) 349 ITR 380 (MP): TC 51R 435]'…………………….. The reasons for reopening must be recorded by jurisdictional AO because he is keeping all relevant and primary record. The basic requirement of section 147 of the Act is…

SUNITA MADHOK ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(2)(1), , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 554/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri H.N. Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. H. Kabila, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 234BSection 69

…es not form, his own belief but merely act at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 148 was bad for non- satisfaction of the conditions precedent [Sheo Narain Jaswal & Ors. v. ITO & Ors. [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Pat.); TC 51R 432.. See also Vishal Swamp Agrawilla v. ITO [1976] CTR (Cal.) 296: TC 51R 432A and Chunnilal Onkarmal (Pvt) Ltd., (1983) 349 ITR 380 (MP): TC 51R 435]'…………………….. The reasons for reopening must be recorded by jurisdictional AO because he is keeping all relevant and primary record. The basic requirement of section 147 of the Act is…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(2)(3), BANGALORE vs. SRI MADE GOWDA THIBBE GOWDA, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and CO of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 910/BANG/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri H. Guruswamy, ITP & Shri Ravi Kiran, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Jt. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 131Section 148

…es not form, his own belief but merely act at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 148 was bad for non- satisfaction of the conditions precedent [Sheo Narain Jaswal & Ors. v. ITO & Ors. [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Pat.); TC 51R 432.. See also Vishal Swamp Agrawilla v. ITO [1976] CTR (Cal.) 296: TC 51R 432A and Chunnilal Onkarmal (Pvt) Ltd., (1983) 349 ITR 380 (MP): TC 51R 435]'…………………….. The reasons for reopening must be recorded by jurisdictional AO because he is keeping all relevant and primary record. The basic requirement of section 147 of the Act is…

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 47/BANG/2021[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 147Section 234DSection 69

…es not form, his own belief but merely act at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 148 was bad for non- satisfaction of the conditions precedent [Sheo Narain Jaswal & Ors. v. ITO & Ors. [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Pat.); TC 51R 432.. See also Vishal Swamp Agrawilla v. ITO [1976] CTR (Cal.) 296: TC 51R 432A and Chunnilal Onkarmal (Pvt) Ltd., (1983) 349 ITR 380 (MP): TC 51R 435]'…………………….. The reasons for reopening must be recorded by jurisdictional AO because he is keeping all relevant and primary record. The basic requirement of section 147 of the Act is…

SHRI. JITENDRA VIRWANI,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 46/BANG/2021[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jun 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 147Section 234DSection 69

…es not form, his own belief but merely act at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that the assumption of jurisdiction under section 148 was bad for non- satisfaction of the conditions precedent [Sheo Narain Jaswal & Ors. v. ITO & Ors. [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Pat.); TC 51R 432.. See also Vishal Swamp Agrawilla v. ITO [1976] CTR (Cal.) 296: TC 51R 432A and Chunnilal Onkarmal (Pvt) Ltd., (1983) 349 ITR 380 (MP): TC 51R 435]'…………………….. The reasons for reopening must be recorded by jurisdictional AO because he is keeping all relevant and primary record. The basic requirement of section 147 of the Act is…

M/S. MARBLE ART,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2480/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “E”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.2478/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2004-05 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAFFM2468R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.2479/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2002-03 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAFFM2468R (Appellant) (Respondent) & ITA.No.2480/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2003-04 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi…

M/S. MARBLE ART,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2479/DEL/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “E”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.2478/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2004-05 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAFFM2468R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.2479/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2002-03 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAFFM2468R (Appellant) (Respondent) & ITA.No.2480/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2003-04 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi…

M/S. MARBLE ART,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2478/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Ramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “E”: DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.2478/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2004-05 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAFFM2468R (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA.No.2479/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2002-03 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAFFM2468R (Appellant) (Respondent) & ITA.No.2480/Del./2013 Assessment Year 2003-04 Marble Art ACIT B-358, New Friends Colony, Circle 22(1) [vs. New Delhi…

PKC SECURITIES ,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-35(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2399/KOL/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Feb 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 148Section 151

…tisfaction is not formed by himself (AO) but on the borrowed satisfaction of DDIT(Inv), which action of AO is legally un-sustainable as held by Hon’ble Patna 11 | P a g e PKC Securities A.Y. 2011-12 High Court in the case of Sheo Narain Jaiswal vs. ITO [1989] 176 ITR 352, wherein their Lordship taking note of section 147 of the Act which clearly stipulates that reason to believe escapement of income should be that of the AO. The opening words of section 147 of the Act reads: “If the assessing officer has reasons to believe that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment…………”. Taking note of this requirem…

ITO, WARD- 2(2), NEW DELHI vs. ALMAK FINANCE PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

ITA 4504/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Oct 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Before Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Mrs. Rano Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 120Section 124(1)Section 127Section 139(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148

…e of jurisdictional AO alone and not of any other AO or authority. Reassessment proceedings initiated on the directions given by the CIT were held to be invalid in CIT v. T. R. Rajkumari [1973] 96 ITR 78 (Mad.) & Sheo Narain Jaswal & Ors. v. ITO & Ors. [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Pat.). Hon'ble Apex Court in CIT v. A. Raman & Co., [1968] 67 ITR 1 (SC) observed that whether on the information in his possession he should commence a proceeding for assessment or reassessment must be decided by the Income-tax Officer and not by the High Court. The Income-tax Officer alone is entrusted with the power to administer the Act; if…

CHATURBHAI NANUBHAI DUDHAT,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4,, BHARUCH

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 953/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chajed, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 151

…to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be "independent" and not "borrowed" or "dictated" satisfaction. Law in this regard is now well-settled. In Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Patna), it was held : "Where the Assessing Officer does not himself exercise his jurisdiction under section 147 but merely acts at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that assumption of jurisdiction was bad for non-satisfaction of the condition precedent." 12. Under the circumstances, only on this ground, impugned notice dated…

CHATURBHAI NANUBHAI DUDHAT,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4,, BHARUCH

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 952/AHD/2014[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Nov 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chajed, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 151

…to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be "independent" and not "borrowed" or "dictated" satisfaction. Law in this regard is now well-settled. In Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Patna), it was held : "Where the Assessing Officer does not himself exercise his jurisdiction under section 147 but merely acts at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that assumption of jurisdiction was bad for non-satisfaction of the condition precedent." 12. Under the circumstances, only on this ground, impugned notice dated…

CHANDRESHBHAI ANANDBHAI DEVANI,,ANKLESHWAR vs. THE DY.CIT, BHARUCH CIRCLE,, BHARUCH

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 951/AHD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Surat16 Nov 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chajed, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Smita Nair, Sr.DR
Section 148Section 151

…to record his/her satisfaction and further mandatory condition is that the satisfaction recorded should be "independent" and not "borrowed" or "dictated" satisfaction. Law in this regard is now well-settled. In Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer [1989] 176 ITR 352 (Patna), it was held : "Where the Assessing Officer does not himself exercise his jurisdiction under section 147 but merely acts at the behest of any superior authority, it must be held that assumption of jurisdiction was bad for non-satisfaction of the condition precedent." 12. Under the circumstances, only on this ground, impugned notice dated…

Showing 1–20 of 38 · Page 1 of 2

Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer (176 ITR 352) — Cited in 38 Judgments | BharatTax