(Vide Jagdish Singh v. Natthu Singh

1 SCC 647Reported decision1992#11928 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 147 Section 148 Section 149 Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 144 Section 254(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 149 service of notice reopening of assessment notice under section 148 section 27 reassessment proceedings section 143(1)section 142(1)section 148 transfer section 147 india

Judgments citing (Vide Jagdish Singh v. Natthu Singh

ED2042 PK AYYAMPALAYAM MPCS LTD.,ERODE vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), ERODE

In the result, the addition made by disallowing deduction u/s

ITA 3308/CHNY/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Jan 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms. Padmavathy S & Shri Manu Kumar Giri

For Appellant: Mr. S. BHUPENDRAN, ADV

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 27Section 3Section 80ASection 80P

…on of service u/s. 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 squarely applies. The appellant cannot be expected to ensure physical delivery beyond dispatch through an authorized postal system. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of M.P. v. Hiralal (1996) 7 SCC 523 held that service shall be deemed to have been effected when the letter is properly addressed, prepaid and posted. CPC cannot disregard this statutory presumption without rebuttal evidence. Further we note that 16.11.2024 was a Saturday and 17.11.2024 a Sunday should have been excluded from the limitation as held by the Hon’ble court in the case of…

ITO, WARD-2, ROHTAK vs. JAI SINGH, ROHTAK

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 8284/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2010-11]

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 274

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘B’: NEW DELHI BEFORE MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2010-11] Income Tax Officer, Shri Jai Singh, Ward-2, Aayakar Bhawan, S/o-Shri Chandgi Ram Saini, Rohtak Vs H. No.2530/1, Saini Anandpura, Behind Gaur School, Rohtak, PAN-BFPPS1050D Revenue Assessee Assessee by Shri Navin Gupta, Adv. Revenue by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 13.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement 11.04.2025 ORDER PER BRAJESH KUMAR SINGH, AM, This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 31.10…

RAJNISH BHARTI HUF,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 20(3)(1), MUMBAI , LALBAUG, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed assessee are dismissed whereas appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 3941/MUM/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. C.V. Jain

Section 143(3)Section 148

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “D” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) ITA Nos. 3912 & 3941/MUM/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Rajnish Bharti HUF, ITO, Circle 20(3)(1), 4/281, Opp. Britannia Biscuit Piramal Chambers Lalbaug, Vs. Company, Reay Road, Darukhana, Mumbai. Mumbai-10. PAN NO. AAEHR 6595 K Appellant Respondent ITA Nos. 4378 & 4377/MUM/2023 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 ITO-41(3)(3), BKC Rajnish Bharti HUF, 436, 4th floor, Kautaliya Bhavan, 4/281, Opp. Britannia Biscuit Mumbai-400051. Vs. Company, Reay R…

RAJNISH BHARTI HUF,MUMBAI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER 20(3)(1), MUMBAI, LALBAUG, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed assessee are dismissed whereas appeals of the Revenue are allowed

ITA 3912/MUM/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh ()

For Appellant: Mrs. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. C.V. Jain

Section 143(3)Section 148

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 15 vs. SHRI HARISH BHASIN

ITA/570/2023HC Delhi09 Dec 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…sement ―refused‖ or ―not available in the house‖ or ―house locked‖ or ―shop closed‖ or ―addressee not in station‖, due service has to be presumed. (Vide Jagdish Singh v. Natthu Singh [(1992) 1 SCC 647 : AIR 1992 SC 1604] ; State of M.P. v. Hiralal [(1996) 7 SCC 523] and V. Raja Kumari v. P. Subbarama Naidu[(2004) 8 SCC 774 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 393] .) It is, therefore, manifest that in view of the presumption available under Section 27 of the Act, it is not necessary to aver in the complaint under Section 138 of the Act that service of notice was evaded by the accused or that the accused had a role to play…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 15 vs. SHRI HARISH BHASIN

ITA/572/2023HC Delhi09 Dec 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

…ce is sent by registered post and is returned with a postal endorsement ―refused‖ or ―not available in the house‖ or ―house locked‖ or ―shop closed‖ or ―addressee not in station‖, due service has to be presumed. (Vide Jagdish Singh v. Natthu Singh [(1992) 1 SCC 647 : AIR 1992 SC 1604] ; State of M.P. v. Hiralal [(1996) 7 SCC 523] and V. Raja Kumari v. P. Subbarama Naidu[(2004) 8 SCC 774 : 2005 SCC (Cri) 393] .) It is, therefore, manifest that in view of the presumption available under Section 27 of the Act, it is not necessary to aver in the complaint under Section 138 of the Act that service of notice…

THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -15 vs. SHRI HARISH BHASIN

ITA/574/2023HC Delhi09 Dec 2024

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DHARMESH SHARMA,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

M/S BABU HAR GOVIND DAYAL TRUST,LUCKNOW vs. INOCME TAX OFFICER-(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 301/LKW/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Jul 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Babu Har Govind Dayal Trust V. The Ito (Exemption) 26/1-G, Wazir Hasan Road Lucknow Near Gokhle Marg Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aabtb2939E (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri A. P. Sinha, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R. Date Of Hearing: 06 07 2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 07 2022 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harish Gidwani, D.R

Section 115Section 115BSection 12ASection 143

…ostal endorsement ‘refused’, or ‘not available in the house’, or ‘house locked’, or ‘shop closed’, or ‘addressee not in station’, due service has to be presumed, [Vide Jagdish Singh v. Natthu Singh: AIR 1992 SC 1604; State of M.P. vs. Hiralal and Ors.: (1966) 7 SCC 523 and V. Raja Kumari V. P. subbarama Naidu and Anr.: (2004) 8 SCC 774].” 15. The Assessing Officer, in the remand proceedings, did not deem it appropriate to issue fresh summons to the alleged donors of the assessee, as indicated above. This, to us, was not proper. It amounted to nonsuiting the assessee neck and crop, i.e., summarily without followi…

PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJAHMUNDRY vs. SRI KAVIVARAPU VENU, E.G.DIST

Appeal is dismissed and disposed of accordingly

ITTA/707/2017HC Telangana22 Nov 2017

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

Section 138Section 378(4)

…her in the notice there was a demand for payment. (See Central Bank of India v. Saxons Farms [(1999) 8 SCC 221: 1999 SCC (Cri) 1411].) 17. At this juncture it is relevant to take note of order passed by this Court in State of M.P. v. Hiralal [(1996) 7 SCC 523]. It was, inter alia, noted as follows: (SCC p. 524, para 1) “1. In view of the office report, it would be clear that the respondents obviously managed to have the notice returned with postal remarks „not available in the house‟, „house locked‟ and „shop closed‟ respectively. In that view, it must be deemed that the notices have been served on…