How many judgments cite Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT?

68 judgments on BharatTax cite Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT (280 ITR 396), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 148, Section 147, Section 159, Section 292B, Section 142(1), Section 139(1).

Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT

280 ITR 396High Court2006#1669 most cited

What is Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT authority for?

Section 292B of the Income Tax Act applies only to procedural irregularities and cannot cure fundamental jurisdictional defects, such as the non-issue of a mandatory Section 148 notice for reassessment or framing an assessment against a non-existing or dead person.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT · Section 148 notice · Section 292B · jurisdictional defect · procedural irregularity · assessment against dead person · non-existing entity · condition precedent · validity of assessment · curable defect

Also reported as

145 Taxmann 186

Sections most often in play

Section 148 Section 147 Section 159 Section 292B Section 142(1)Section 139(1)Section 263 Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 263of section 2(7)section 159 cost plus method section 292b legal representative inadequate enquiry section 34(1)section 292 revision under section 263 jda section 21

Judgments citing Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT

Gestener (India) Limited (Since Merged With Ricoh India Limited), Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata.

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

ITA 619/KOL/2013[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Aug 2017AY 1999-2000

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 481

…Gestetner (India) Ltd. , AY 1999-2000 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम")Before "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/and "ी एम .बालागणेश, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A. No. 619/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 1999-2000 Gestetner (India) Ltd. (Since merged Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, with Richo India Ltd.) Circle-1, Kolkata. (PAN: AABCG1103A) Appellant Respondent & I.T.A. No. 981/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 1999-2000 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Gestetner (India) Ltd. (Since merged Circle-1,…

Gestetner (India) Limited (Since Merged With Ricoh India Ltd.), Kolkata vs. ACIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed and that of assessee are allowed

ITA 275/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Mrs. Sushmita Basu, CA & Sh. Amit Patra, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Sucheta Bandyopadhyay, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 481

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C ” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri Mahavir Singh, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A No. 275/Kol/2007 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Gestetner (India) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, (PAN:AABCP5702G) Circle-1, Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No.148/Kol/2007 Assessment Year: 2003-04 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. Gestetner (India) Ltd. Circle-1, Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No. 595/Kol/2008 Assessment Year: 2004-05 Gestetner (India) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-1, Kolkata. (Appellant) (Respondent) & I.T.A No.783/…

DCIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S. Gestetner (India) Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of revenue are dismissed and that of assessee are allowed

ITA 148/KOL/2007[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Feb 2016AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Mrs. Sushmita Basu, CA & Sh. Amit Patra, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Sucheta Bandyopadhyay, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 481

Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I vs. Chetan Gupta

The appeal is dismissed but, in the facts and circumstances of the

ITA/72/2014HC Delhi15 Sept 2015

Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148

…22. Mr. Singh also referred to Section 292 BB of the Act. Reliance was also placed on the decision in CIT v. Shital Prasad Kharag Prasad 280 ITR 541 (All); CIT v. Hotline International Pvt. Ltd. 296 ITR 333 (Del); Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT 280 ITR 396 (All); P.N. Sasikumar v. CIT (1988) 170 ITR 80 (Ker); Venad Properties (P) Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 340 ITR 463 (Del) and Mayawati v. CIT (2010) 321 ITR 349 (Del). 23. In reply, Mr. Ajay Vohra submitted that notice to an Assessee under Section 148 and 143 (2) of the Act was different from a notice under Section 142 (1)…

Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board vs. Addl.DIT

In the result, the appeal by the Assessee is allowed

ITA 378/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)

Section 11Section 12ASection 2(15)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment year : 2009-10 M/s. Karnataka Industrial Vs. The Additional Director of Area Development Board, Income Tax (Exemptions), No.14/3, 2nd Floor, Range 17, R.P. Building, Bangalore. Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore – 560 001. PAN: AAATK 1350J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Padamchand Khincha, CA Respondent by : Smt. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR) Date of hearing : 25.08.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 04.09.2015 O R D E R Per N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member T…

Commissioner of Income Tax –II vs. M/S Micron Steels Pvt. Ltd

ITA/19/2014HC Delhi11 Feb 2015

Section 170Section 391

…15:DHC:1375-DB ITA Nos. 19-24/2014 Page 9 as it had a glaring inherent defect which could not be cured in spite of the deeming effect of Section 292B of the 1961 Act.” 15. Likewise, in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh Vs. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 396, the Allahabad High Court held that the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is a condition precedent to the validity of any assessment order to be passed under section 147 of the Act and when such a notice is not issued and assessment made, such a defect cannot be treated as cured under Section 292B of the Act. The Court…

Commissioner of Income Tax (C)-II vs. Micra India Pvt Ltd

ITA/441/2013HC Delhi22 Jan 2015

Section 153CSection 292BSection 391

…ubrogated to the rights of another insured company was held not to be entitled to maintain an action in the name of the company after the latter had been dissolved” XXX XXX XXX 15. Likewise, in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh Vs. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 396, the Allahabad High Court held 2015:DHC:745 ITA 441/2013 & connected matters Page 5 that the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is a condition precedent to the validity of any assessment order to be passed under section 147 of the Act and when such a notice is not issued and assessment made, such a defect cannot…

Spice Enfotainment Ltd

ITA - 475 / 2011HC Delhi03 Aug 2011

Section 143Section 292B

…Revenue, was an absolutely invalid return as it had a glaring inherent defect which could not be cured in spite of the deeming effect of Section 292B of the 1961 Act.” 15. Likewise, in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh Vs. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 396, the Allahabad High Court held that the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is a condition precedent to the validity of any assessment order to be passed under section 147 of the Act and when such a notice is not issued and assessment made, such a defect cannot be treated as cured under Section 292B of the Act. The Cour…