Sumit Balkrishna Gupta v. Asstt. CIT

103 Taxmann.com 188High Court2019#5149 most cited

What is Sumit Balkrishna Gupta v. Asstt. CIT authority for?

A notice for reassessment issued in the name of a deceased person is void ab initio and cannot be validated by curative provisions like Section 292B or 292BB, as issuing notice to the correct person is a fundamental jurisdictional requirement.

23

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2019 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Sumit Balkrishna Gupta · notice to dead person · void notice · Section 147 · Section 148 · Section 292B · Section 292BB · legal representative · reopening of assessment · jurisdiction

Also reported as

414 ITR 292262 Taxmann 61

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 144Section 148Section 292BSection 292BBSection 159(2)(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 159legal representativesection 292bsection 292bbsection 149(1)(b)section 292section 149(1)section 29section 149reopening of assessmentsection 148a(b)notice under section 148

Judgments citing Sumit Balkrishna Gupta v. Asstt. CIT

Smt. Lalita Rawat, 40, Rawat Palace, Near Murli Manohar Mandie, Bas Padanpura, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward-5(5), Jaipur, Ward-5(5)

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 671/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Aug 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Issuing The Notice. 2. That The Authorities Below Have Failed To Appreciate The Fact Of Re-Assessment Notice & Consequential Re-Assessment

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish SharmaFor Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena (ACIT)
Section 144Section 147Section 148

…valid and void ab initio. In support, reliance was placed on the Co-ordinate Bench decision in case of Balbir Singh vs ITO 72 ITR (Trib) 389 and decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of Sumit Balkrishna Gupta vs. Assistant CIT, Circle 16(2) (2019) 414 ITR 292 (Bom). 5. Per contra, the ld. DR submitted that on the basis of the information available on record, action u/s 147 was initiated in the case of assessee and after taking prior approval from the competent authority, notice u/s 148 was issued on 30.03.2016 and served through registered post. Therefore, the proceedings initiated were as per law an…

M.Raghurama Raju L/R of (Late) M Radha Mohan Raju, Visakhapatnam vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 529/VIZ/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2020AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.529/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) M Raghurama Raju Vs Income Tax Officer L/R Of (Late) M.Radha Mohan Raju Ward-2(2) Flat No.306, Charan Castle Visakhapatnam Sairam Colony Madhurawada Visakhapatnam [Pan : Agxpm9324L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Smt U Mini Chandran, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.06.2020 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.06.2020 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri D.S.Sunder Singh: Delay: This Appeal Is Filed By The Legal Representative Of The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)]-1, Visakhapatnam In I.T.A.No.0111/2015-16/Ito,W-2(2),Vsp/2019-20 Dated 14.06.2019 For The Assessment Year (A.Y.)2007-08 With A Delay Of 3 Days.

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt U Mini Chandran, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 50C

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणमपीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (through web-based video conferencing platform) श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.529/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2007-08) M Raghurama Raju Vs Income Tax Officer L/R of (Late) M.Radha Mohan Raju Ward-2(2) Flat No.306, Charan Castle Visakhapatnam Sairam Colony Madhurawada Visakhapatnam [PAN : AGXPM9324L] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर…

Sri . Aemala Venkateswara Rao, Guntur vs. The ITO, Guntur

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 227/VIZ/2017[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Apr 2019AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.227/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2007-08) Sri Aemala Venkateswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Asst.In The Name Of Ward-2(1) Aemala Nirmala Devi Guntur L/R Of Sri Aemala Venkateswara Rao 5-93-39; 6/13 Brodipet Guntur [Pan :Aespa0834Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri C.Kameswara Rao, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से/ Respondent By : Smt.Suman Malik, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03 .03.2019

For Appellant: Shri C.Kameswara Rao, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Suman Malik, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 159

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री िी. दुगाा राि,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस. सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER& SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.227/VIZ/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2007-08) Sri Aemala Venkateswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer Asst.in the name of Ward-2(1) Aemala Nirmala Devi Guntur L/R of Sri Aemala Venkateswara Rao 5-93-39; 6/13 Brodipet Guntur [PAN :AESPA0834Q] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/…