Sheo Narain Jaiswal v. Income-tax Officer

176 ITR 352High Court1989#3077 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 366,470 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

Chandreshbhai Anandbhai Devani, Ankleshwar vs. The Dy.CIT, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 950/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…

Shri Himatbhai Anandbhai Devani, Ankleshwar vs. The Dy.CIT, Bharuch Circle, Bharuch

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 2872/AHD/2013[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…

Shri Jaysukhbhai Nanubhai Dudhat, Ankleshwar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Bharuch

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 2871/AHD/2013[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…

Jayagauri Chandresh Devani, Ankleshwar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Bharuch

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 2679/AHD/2013[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…

Shri Himatbhai Anandbhai Devani, Ankleshwar vs. The Dy.CIT, Bharuch Cirsle, Bharuch

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 2678/AHD/2013[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…

Shri Jaysukhbhai Nanubhai Dudhat, Ankleshwar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Bharuch

In the result, all appeals of the assesses are allowed

ITA 2677/AHD/2013[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…

C. Sanyasi Raju vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle, Vizag

ITTA/7/2005HC Telangana21 Nov 2017

Bench: C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY,T.AMARNATH GOUD

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…

M/S Grand Slam Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed partly for statistical purpose

ITA 1791/DEL/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Sh. I.C. Sudhir & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2003-04

Section 131Section 13aSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…R (Guj) 62 : (1999) 236 ITR 832 (Guj); Ganga Saran & Sons (P) Ltd. vs. ITO & Ors. (1981) 22 CTR (SC) 112 : (1981) 130 ITR 1 (SC); Birla VXL Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (1996) 130 CTR (Guj) 281 : (1996) 217 ITR 1 (Guj); Sheo Narain Jaiswal & Ors. vs. ITO & Ors. (1989) 176 ITR 352 (Pat); Phool Chand Bajrang Lal & Anr. vs. ITO & Anr. (1993) 113 CTR (SC) 436 : (1993) 203 ITR 456 (SC); Anant Kumar Saharia vs. CIT & Ors. (1999) 151 CTR (Gau) 556 : (1998) 232 ITR 533 (Gau); Bombay Pharma Products vs. ITO (1999) 153 CTR (MP) 350 : (1999) 237 ITR 614 (MP); H.A. Nanji & Co. vs. ITO (1979) 120 ITR 593 (Cal); N.D. Bhatt, IAC & Anr.…

M/S. Krish Fragrance (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 5783/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2006-07 M/S Krish Fragrance (P) Ltd., Income Tax Officer, A-703, Happy Home Vs. Ward 5(3), Delhi Apartments, (Now Ward 14(4), Delhi Sector-7, Udaipur, Dwarka, New Delhi (Pan:Aacck4867E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Kapoor & Sh. Sumit LalFor Respondent: Ms. Bedobina Chaudhuri, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 151(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER A.Y. : 2006-07 M/S KRISH FRAGRANCE (P) LTD., INCOME TAX OFFICER, A-703, HAPPY HOME VS. WARD 5(3), DELHI APARTMENTS, (NOW WARD 14(4), DELHI SECTOR-7, UDAIPUR, DWARKA, NEW DELHI (PAN:AACCK4867E) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee by : Sh. Salil Kapoor & Sh. Sumit Lal Chandani, Advs. Department by : Ms. Bedobina Chaudhuri, Sr. DR ORDER The Assessee has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 5/9/2016 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-5), Delhi on the following grounds…

The ITO-2(2), Bhopal vs. Shri Sandeep Kumar Dubey, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed on both

ITA 391/IND/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Indore20 Mar 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 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…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mirabelle International, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2213/DEL/2014[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Aug 2016AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri O.P. Kanta.Y. : 2001-02 Acit, Circle-31(1), M/S Mirabelle International New Delhi Vs. 13/14, Windsor Mansion, Room No. 1405, 15Th Floor, Janpath, New Delhi – 110 001 Dr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, (Pan: Aabfm1743P) Civic Centre, New Delhi

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Surender Pal. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 2Section 2(16)Section 292BSection 80H

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER A.Y. : 2001-02 ACIT, CIRCLE-31(1), M/S MIRABELLE INTERNATIONAL NEW DELHI VS. 13/14, WINDSOR MANSION, ROOM NO. 1405, 15TH FLOOR, JANPATH, NEW DELHI – 110 001 DR. SHYAMA PRASAD MUKHERJEE, (PAN: AABFM1743P) CIVIC CENTRE, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Department by : Sh. Surender Pal. Sr. DR Assessee by : None Date of Hearing : 20-07-2016 Date of Order : 08-08-2016 ORDER PER H.S. SIDHU : JM The Revenue has filed the present appeal against the impugned order dated 19…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Pyramid Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 435/DEL/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal. & Shri Chandra Mohan Garg

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Anantharaman, CAFor Respondent: Shri Nandita Kanchan, CIT-DR
Section 131Section 142Section 69

…appellant relied on the following case laws in support of this ground: Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills Ltd. vs. CIT 26 ITR IT (SC) 1. CIT vs. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. 144 ITR 225 (SC) 2. Gujarat Gas Co. Ltd. vs. JCIT 245 ITR 84 (Guj.) 3. ITO vs. Sheo Narain Jaiswal 176 ITR 352 (Patna) 4. CIT vs. Girnish Choudhary 256 ITR 919 (Del.) 5. CIT Ashwini Kumar vs. ITO 39 ITD 183 (Delhi Bench Hon’ble 6. Tribunal) 19.1.6 Besides the above, I also place reliance in the judicial pronouncement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation vs. VC Shukla (1998) 3 SCC 410 where it was held as under: "It is…

The Commissioner of Income Tax-III vs. M/s.Samrakshna Electricals Ltd

ITTA/28/2010HC Telangana21 Mar 2016

Bench: RAMESH RANGANATHAN,M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY

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…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Observer Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1186/DEL/2009[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. DAM Kanunjna, SR. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, ITA No. 1185 & 1186/Del /2009 [Assessment Years: 2000-01 & 2002-03] The I.T.O Vs. M/s Observer Investment & Ward 13(4) Finance Pvt. Ltd New Delhi C/o RRA Tax India [Advisors & Advocates] C-8, East of Kailash, New Delhi PAN : AAACO 1463 G CO No. 118 & 119/Del/2009 [A/o ITA No. 1185 & 1186/Del /2009] [Assessment Years: 2000-01 & 2002-03] M/s Observer Investment & Vs. The I.T.O Finance Pvt. Ltd Ward 13(4) C/o RRA Tax India New Delhi [Advisors & Advocates] C-8…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Observer Investment & Finance Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue stand dismissed and cross objections of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1185/DEL/2009[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Feb 2016AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. DAM Kanunjna, SR. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘E’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, ITA No. 1185 & 1186/Del /2009 [Assessment Years: 2000-01 & 2002-03] The I.T.O Vs. M/s Observer Investment & Ward 13(4) Finance Pvt. Ltd New Delhi C/o RRA Tax India [Advisors & Advocates] C-8, East of Kailash, New Delhi PAN : AAACO 1463 G CO No. 118 & 119/Del/2009 [A/o ITA No. 1185 & 1186/Del /2009] [Assessment Years: 2000-01 & 2002-03] M/s Observer Investment & Vs. The I.T.O Finance Pvt. Ltd Ward 13(4) C/o RRA Tax India New Delhi [Advisors & Advocates] C-8…

Smt Fuleswari Das, Nadia vs. ITO, WD-3, Murshidabad, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are allowed

ITA 615/KOL/2014[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2015AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm]

For Appellant: S/ Shri A. K. Chakraborty & P. S. Gupta, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Tanuj Niyogi, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” “A” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Mahavir Singh, JM] I.T.A Nos.613 & 614/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Shri Ashok Kr. Das Vs. Income-tax Officer,Wd-3, Murshidabad (PAN: AGAPD6043J) (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A Nos.615 & 616/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Smt. Fuleswari Das Vs. Income-tax Officer,Wd-3, Murshidabad (PAN: AGAPD6044R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 08.12.2015 Date of pronouncement: 11.12.2015 For the Appellant: S/ Shri A. K. Chakraborty & P. S. Gupta, Advocates For the Respondent: Shri Tanuj Niyogi, JCIT, Sr. DR O…

Sri Ashok Kr. Das, Nadia vs. ITO, WD-3, Murshidabad, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals of assessees are allowed

ITA 613/KOL/2014[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2015AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm]

For Appellant: S/ Shri A. K. Chakraborty & P. S. Gupta, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Tanuj Niyogi, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” “A” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Mahavir Singh, JM] I.T.A Nos.613 & 614/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Shri Ashok Kr. Das Vs. Income-tax Officer,Wd-3, Murshidabad (PAN: AGAPD6043J) (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A Nos.615 & 616/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2003-04 & 2004-05 Smt. Fuleswari Das Vs. Income-tax Officer,Wd-3, Murshidabad (PAN: AGAPD6044R) (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 08.12.2015 Date of pronouncement: 11.12.2015 For the Appellant: S/ Shri A. K. Chakraborty & P. S. Gupta, Advocates For the Respondent: Shri Tanuj Niyogi, JCIT, Sr. DR O…

M/s.GVK Petro Chemicals Private Limited, (Novo Resins AND vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

ITTA/8/2005HC Telangana05 Jul 2012
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…