“notice under section 148”

ReassessmentSection 148Section 1487,377 judgments

The decision most relied on for notice under section 148 is CIT v. Kabul Chawla (380 ITR 573), cited in 3,235 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on notice under section 148

CIT v. Kabul Chawla

380 ITR 573 · 2016 · High Court

3,235

citing judgments

In a search assessment under Section 153A, additions can only be made for completed or non-abated assessment years if incriminating material relevant to those years is found during the search, although notice under Section 153A(1) is mandatorily issued for six assessment years preceding the search.

CIT v. Sinhgad Technical Education Society

397 ITR 344 · 2017 · Supreme Court

1,589

citing judgments

For assessments under Section 153C, a notice is legally unsustainable if there is no incriminating material correlated to the specific assessment years for which reassessment is sought.

GKN Driveshafts (India) Ltd. v. ITO

259 ITR 19 · 2003 · Supreme Court

1,349

citing judgments

When a notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is issued, the Assessing Officer is bound to furnish reasons for reopening upon the assessee's request and must dispose of the assessee's objections to the notice by passing a speaking order.

ACIT v. Rajesh Jhaveri Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd.

291 ITR 500 · 2007 · Supreme Court

1,030

citing judgments

For initiating reassessment proceedings under Section 147, the Assessing Officer needs only prima facie material providing a reason to believe that income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or the sufficiency/correctness of the material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice under Section 148.

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. v. ITO

236 ITR 34 · 1999 · Supreme Court

862

citing judgments

For reassessment proceedings under Section 148, the Assessing Officer only needs prima facie material to have a reason to believe income has escaped assessment. Conclusive proof or evaluation of the sufficiency and correctness of such material is not required at the stage of issuing the notice.

Union of India v. Rajeev Bansal

469 ITR 46 · 2024 · Supreme Court

713

citing judgments

The legal fiction created by the Ashish Agarwal judgment stops the limitation clock for Section 148 notices from the date of the deemed notice. Orders issued without proper jurisdiction, or those inconsistent with statutory prescriptions, are a nullity, and there can be no waiver of such fundamental jurisdictional requirements.

Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. R.B. Wadkar

268 ITR 332 · 2004 · High Court

695

citing judgments

The validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147, by issuing a notice under Section 148, must be judged solely on the reasons originally recorded by the Assessing Officer. These recorded reasons cannot be supplemented, improved upon, or modified at any later stage.

Tin Box Company v. CIT

249 ITR 216 · 2001 · Supreme Court

624

citing judgments

When an issue is remitted to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, the AO must conduct a de novo examination and provide the assessee a full opportunity of being heard. The assessee is bound to comply with the notices issued by the AO.

Judgments citing notice under section 148

Natarajan, Cuddalore vs. ITO, Itward-1(1), Chennai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 123/CHNY/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Oct 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriand Hon’Ble Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.123/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2011-2012 Shri Natarajan The Income Tax Officer, 353, Pudupettai Main Road, Vs. International Taxation, Indira Nagar, C. Puthupettai, Ward 2(1), Parangipettai Post, Chennai 600 006 Cuddalore 608 502. Pan: Anfpn 9506Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/Appellant By : Shri. J. Saravanan, Advocate ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Samuel Pitta, Irs, Jcit.

For Appellant: Shri. J. Saravanan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Samuel Pitta, IRS, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 148

elaborate contentions both on legal and factual aspects. Firstly, in law, it is submitted that the first respondent lacks jurisdiction to issue reassessment notice under section 148 of the Act; when the same was pointed out by the appellant, the first respondent transferred the entire files to the jurisdictional assessing ... respondent, who inturn, continued the reassessment proceedings by issuing notice under section 143(2) r/w 129 of the Act, without issuing any fresh notice under section 148 of the Act; and hence, the notices so issued by the respective respondents are invalid and the same vitiate the reassessment proceedings. Secondly

Amratlal and Dhirajlal and Co, Mumbai vs. DCIT 23(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2875/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)Section 271FSection 694

Officer to finally ascertain the fact by legal evidence or conclusion for forming the prima facie belief. Further, even after the issue of notice under section 148, when this information surfaced out, there are no evidence before the Assessing Officer that deposit of cash had been examined in the original ... thereon has been correctly accounted for. Ld. CIT(A) found no infirmity in the initiation of proceedings under section 147 by issue of notice under section 148 by holding that Assessing Officer had sufficient material on record for him to form the prima facie belief that income had escaped assessment

Dr. Farokh Master, Mumbai vs. Addll/Joint/Deputy /Asst/Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2420/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2018-19 Dr. Farokh Master, Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, 1St Floor, Vatcha Gandhi Circle-16(2), Memorial Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hughes Road, Churchgate, Babulnath, Mumbai. Mumbai Pan : Aalpm3004F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri V. Chandrasekhar A/W. Shri Harshad Shah For Revenue : Shri Aashish Kumar,Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 28-10-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-10-2024 Order Per B.R. Baskaran, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrasekhar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Aashish Kumar,Sr.DR

Section 147Section 148

other income which has escaped assessment and which, comes to his notice during the course of the proceedings. However, if after issuing a notice under section 148, he accepted the contention of the assessee and holds that the income which he has initially formed a reason to believe had escaped ... escaped assessment, it is not open to him independently to assess some other income. If he intends to do so, a fresh notice under section 148 would be necessary, the legality of which would be tested in the event of a challenge by the assessee.” 4 Admittedly, in the instant

Halwasiya Properties Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-3(5), Lucknow

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

ITA 204/LKW/2022[F.Y. 2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Oct 2024

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2012-13 Halwasiya Properties Private Income Tax Officer-3(5), Lucknow Limited, Halwasiya Court, Vs. New, Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, 57, Hazratganj, Lucknow- Ram Tirath Marg, Lucknow- 226001 226001 Pan:Aaach9708D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Devashish Mehrotra, Adv Revenue By: Sh. Gayasuddin, Cit Dr. Date Of Hearing: 03.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024 O R D E R Per Sh. Nikhil Choudhary: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act Passed On 23.09.2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Is Without Proper Opportunity & Contrary To The Principles Of Audi Alteram Partem And, Therefore, The Same Is Bad In Law & Deserves To Be Set Aside. 2. That On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case As Well As In Law, The Cit(A), Nfac Is Not Justified In Treating The Loan Of Rs.50,00,000/- Taken By The Appellant As Fictitious Loan. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred In Law & On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 1,25,000/- For Alleged Accommodation Entry Of Loan @ 2.5% & Subjecting To Tax In The Hands Of The Appellant.

For Appellant: Sh. Devashish Mehrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gayasuddin, CIT DR

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250

such accommodation entries, parties had paid undisclosed cash of equivalent amount and a commission of 2.5% of the same amount. He, therefore, issued notice under section 148 to all beneficiaries of loans from M/s Big Broker House Stock Limited including the assessee company. The assessee apparently asked for a copy ... reasons recorded under section 147, that had led to the belief that the income that had purportedly escaped assessment, according to the notice under section 148, was not being subjected to tax and for this reason, proper compliance could not be made . We observe that the expectation that reasons

Dinesh Ramanbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1506/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1506/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dinesh Ramanbhai Patel The Ito बनाम/ 23, Shyam Sharan Part-2 Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Aarohi Club Road Ahmedabad Bopal-Ghuma Ahmedabad – 380 058 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Btbpp 3659 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250(6)Section 272ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 272A(3)(aa)Section 69

consultant, Mr. Yagnesh Kahar, who created his e-filing account and handled tax filings starting from A.Y. 2019-20. 2. A notice under Section 148 was issued on 26.03.2021 for A.Y. 2017-18, but it was sent to an email address created by the consultant, and not directly

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Ankur Agrawal, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2308/MUM/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2011-12 Acit 4(1)(1), Mumbai Ankur Agrawal 2401, 2402, Anmol Pride, Opp. Vs. Patel Auto Petrol Pump, Off Sv Road Goregaon West, Mumbai- 400062. Pan: Akopa 7201 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Chandra, CIT, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

submitted are legal propositions that is, no new facts are to be brought on record – 1. The Assessing Officer erred in issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. It is contended that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the issue of notice

Aravind Reddy Devagiri, Guntur vs. Income Tax Office, Ward-2(2), Guntur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 267/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.267/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Aravind Reddy Devagiri V. Income Tax Officer – Ward 2(2) 14-19-35, 1St Lane Vijayapuri Guntur Andhra Pradesh Jkc College Road, Guntur 522006 Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Auepd7820R] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(x)Section 68Section 69A

there are reasons to believe that the income has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Act and thereafter issued notice under section 148 of the Act on 12.03.2020 after obtaining prior approval from the JCIT, Range – 2, Guntur. In response, assessee did not file any return

Joykutty Selistine, Kollam vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 721/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.721/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 Joykutty Selistine The Ito बनाम/ Puthuvayal House Ward-1(2)(2) V/S. Palliserrikal, Sastham Cottah Ahmedabad Kollam Kollam 690 521, Kerala "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Altps 3335 G अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) .. Assessee By : Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir Vora, Ars Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia &For Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

received through the Non-filers Monitoring System (NMS) indicating cash deposits of Rs.22,71,200/- in the assessee’s ICICI Bank account. Despite notices under section 148 of the Act and subsequent notices under section 142(1) of the Act, the assessee did not respond, resulting in the assessment being ... prosecution due to the lack of response to the notices. The substantive issues raised by the assessee, such as the validity of the notice under section 148 of the Act and the explanation for the cash deposits, were not addressed in the order. The Addl.CIT(A) solely relied

Mayursinh Jayandrasinh Jadeja, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Wad-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 233/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri P. F. Jain, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

Annual Information Return (AIR), which indicated that the assessee had engaged in share transactions amounting to Rs.1,07,17,000/-. Consequently, a notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on March 30, 2017. Despite this, the assessee did not file a return in response to the notice ... Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), asserting several grounds. Firstly, the assessee contended that the assessment order was issued without jurisdiction because the notice under section 148 of the Act was allegedly not served on the assessee, and therefore, Mayursinh Jayandrasinh Jadeja vs. ITO Asst.Year –2010-11 - 3– the assessment should

Kalpeshbhai Amthabhai Desai, Mehsana vs. ITO (Ward 1), Mehsana

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

ITA 1271/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1271/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 Kalpeshbhai Amthabhai The Ito बनाम/ Desai Ward-1 V/S. Rabari Vas Mehsana At & Post : Chhathiyarda Ta & Dist. Mehsana Mehsana – 384 002 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Auzpd 9800 A अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) .. Assessee By : Shri Ankit S. Rajyaguru, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 23/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Ankit S. Rajyaguru, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR

Section 148Section 69A

originally file a return of income, as the total income was below the basic exemption limit under the Act. Subsequently, a notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued by the AO on 25.03.2019, prompting the assessee to file a return on 10.04.2019, declaring a total income of Rs.1

Dharmendra Shantilal Patel, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 660/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

various parties. Consequently, the case of the assessee was re-opened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, and a notice under section 148 was issued on March 28, 2017. In response to the notice issued under section 148, the assessee did not file a return of income

Dharmendra Shantilal Patel, HUF, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1) Now Ward-5(3)(1), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 590/AHD/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Kona Shanthi Kumari, Kommanapalli vs. Assement Unit, Delhi

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

ITA 372/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 372/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Kona Shanthi Kumari V. Assessment Unit Income Tax Department 2-64/2, Kommanapalli Nfac, Delhi Tuni, Kakinada – 533449 Andhra Pradesh [Pan : Dwbpk4623P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69

remains unexplained. The case was reopened for re-assessment under section 147 of the Act after obtaining prior approval of the competent authority. Notice under section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2022 was issued and served on assessee. In response, assessee filed the return of income admitting a total income

Subba Rao Jaladi, Guntur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur

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

ITA 371/VIZ/2024[2013-14 ]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 147rSection 148Section 194CSection 250Section 250(6)

escaped assessment within the meaning of provisions of Sec.147 of the Act. Assessing Officer reopened the assessment by issue of notice under section 148 of the Act after obtaining the Page No. 2 I.T.A. No. 371/VIZ/2024 Subbarao Jaladi approval from Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax. In response to notice under section

The Society of Jesus Mary Joseph Snehalaya, Mangalagiri vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur

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

ITA 369/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

Section 12ASection 139Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 48Section 69Section 69A

filed return of income u/s 139 of the Act for A.Y. 2015- 16. Accordingly, the case was reopened by issue of notice under section 148 of the Act dated 08.04.2022 after passing order under section 148A(d) of the Act. The assessee has not filed return of income in response ... same has not given 7 clear days for compliance, consequently the entire reassessment proceedings are invalid and void ab initio. 3. The notice under section 148 dated 08.04.2022 issued by the Income- tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur is invalid for the reason that: i. The notice has been issued

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Ernakulam, Kerala

ITA 749/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Puthencruz Via, Ernakulam, Kerala - 682302 Sir, Sub: Reasons recorded for issue of notice u/s 148 for A.Y.2009-10 The reasons recorded for issue of notice under section 148 for A.Y.2009-10 are as 1. Brought forward losses of A.Y. 2008-09 have not been correctly declared by the assessee in the return

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi, Kerala

ITA 736/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

Aptiv Connection Systems India Private Limited, Kochi, Kerala vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), Kochi, Ernakulam, Kerala

ITA 735/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148

ITO, Corporate Ward1, Coimbatore vs. Cheran Enterprises Private Limited, Coimbatore

In the result the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 1734/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1717/Chny/2024, निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years:2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1730/Chny/2024, निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years:2014-15 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1733/Chny/2024, निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years:2013-14 आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1734/Chny/2024, निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Years:2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CA & Mr.ShreyanshFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)

deducted. As the assesse had not filed any Return of Income (ROI) for AY under consideration, the Ld. AO proceeded to issue notice under section 148 r.w.s 147 of the Act requiring filing of income tax return. No ROI was filed. There was no response to ITA Nos.1717

ITO, Corporate Ward1, Coimbatore vs. Cheran Enterprises Private Limited, Coimbatore

In the result the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 1733/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, CA & Mr.ShreyanshFor Respondent: Ms.Gouthami Manivasagam, JCIT

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)