← All Phrases

“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

Vinod Brijmohandas Agrawal, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 432/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 147Section 148Section 68

deleted.” 3. The assessee is an individual and filed his return of income on 05.08.2017 declaring total income of Rs.10,93,180/-. Notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 31.03.2021 for reopening assessment. Return of income was filed against the notice under Section 148

M/S. Rushabhdev Infra Projects Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward- 3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1287/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250

Action under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was initiated in the assessee’s case on the basis of reasons recorded. Notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued and served to the assessee on 18.03.2020. The return of income declaring total income of Rs.21

Mahesh Bhikhabhai Patel L/H of Late Bhikhabhai B.Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

ITA 834/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumarasstt.Year : 2011-12 Mahesh Bhikhabhai Patel Ito, Ward-3(2)(1) L/H. Of Bhikhabhai B Patel Vs Ahmedabad. 1/2/6, Mota Parkota, Viramgam Ahmedabad. Pan : Bhbpp 2219 K (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri Parin Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Ravindra, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/10/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 08/10/2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri Parin Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, SR.DR
Section 148Section 250

reads as under: 2 “2. The ld.AO has further erred in assuming jurisidciton on the legal heirs of deceased without serving the valid notice under section 148 of the Act to the legal heir.” 5. On perusal of the record, I find that the ld.CIT(A) has passed an order

The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Shri Sunil Bajranglal Hurkat, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed

ITA 508/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 10(38)Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

case was reopened under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 after duly recording the reasons and due sanction of PCIT. Accordingly, notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 22.03.2019 and duly served upon the assessee. Thereafter, notice under Section 143(2) of the Act dated ... issued to the assessee. The assessee did not file return of income on 03.04.2019 in response to notice under Section 148 of the Act. Notice under Section 142(1) of the Act was also issued to the assessee. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee is an individual and considering

Moiz Hakimuddin Boriawala, United Arab Emirate vs. Income Tax Officer, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 588/MUM/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

Section 133Section 142Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 195Section 69

after taking approval under section 151 of the act the assessment proceedings under section 147 of the act were initiated by issuance of notice under section 148 of the act on 25/3/2019. The above notice was sent through speed post and therefore the learned AO held that same is served ... Interactive Ltd. Ld. AO noted that assessee has not filed his return of income in response to the notice under section 148 of the act. Further notices were also sent under section 142 (1) on various dates and therefore the learned AO relying on the decision of the Page

Naples Constructions Private Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT 3(2)(2), Income Tax

In the result ground number 1 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3066/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2014-15 Naples Constructions Pvt. Dcit 3(2)(2), Ltd. 514 Dalamal Tower Mumbai 211 Fpj Marg, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan Aaccn 3578P Assessee By Shri Pradip N Kapasi Revenue By Shri S Srinivasu, Cit (Dr), 30Th July, 2024 Date Of Hearing 08Th October, 2024 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 143Section 147Section 148

return was revised on 28/3/2016 at a loss of Rs. 31,937/–. Thereafter the case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice under Section 148 of the act on 17/3/2017 for the reasons and elaborate recorded at page number 2 – 4 of the paper

Narendra Shankar Gavand, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward 3(1), Thane

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1057/MUM/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2010-11 Narendra Shankar Gavand, Ito, A-303, Pushp Parag, Chs Ward 3(1), Pokharan Road No.1, Thane Vs. Samta Nagar, Thane (West) (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan Aehpg 2061E Assessee By Shri Subodh Ratnaparkhi Revenue By Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. (Dr)

Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 50CSection 55(2)(b)

sale consideration was held as an escaped income. The case for the assessee was reopened under section 147 of the act by issuing notice under section 148 of the act on 31/3/2017. The reasons recorded clearly showed that despite selling the property for such a huge consideration the assessee

Late Batul Mohsin Roowala Thru Legal Heir, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 17(1), Mumbai

In the result we direct the learned assessing officer to delete the penalty of Rs

ITA 1008/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm A.Y.2012-13 Late Batul Mohsin Roowala Acit, Through Legal Heir, Circle 17(1), C/O F/2, Palm Springs, Mumbai 104 Cuffe Parade, Vs. Mumbai (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan Ahhpr 0003L Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha, Sr. (Dr), 31St July, 2024 Date Of Hearing 08Th October 2024 Date Of Pronouncement

Section 147Section 148Section 271

income. The assessee did not challenge the assessment order. 3. In the penalty proceedings the assessee submitted that as soon as the notice under section 148 of the Act was received, the assessee realized her mistake and revised the return of income in response to notice for reopening ... This was owned by the assessee as A Y : 2012–13 Late Batul Mohsin Roowala Versus ACIT, Mumbai soon of the notice under section 148 of the income tax Act was received by the assessee and disclosed the additional capital gain of Rs. 2,656,721/–. We find that

Kanukuntla Lakshminarayana, Kothagudem vs. ITO., Ward-1, Kothagudem

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 857/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.857/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Kanukuntla Lakshminarayana Vs. Income Tax Officer Kothagudem Ward-1 [Pan :Cpepk6208M] Kothagudem अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri M.Chandramouleswara Rao, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Aves Madhukar, Dr

For Appellant: Shri M.Chandramouleswara Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri AVES Madhukar, DR
Section 148

file his return of income for the assessment year 2016-17. Assessee declared his total income of Rs.1,50,000/- against notice under section 148 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”). Learned Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.93,90,000/- in his account

De-Con Projects P Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-8(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed

ITA 775/KOL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: passing original assessment order under Section 143(3), the same was examined by him and therefore, it is nothing but change of opinion and as such not in accordance with law.

Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 147Section 147rSection 148Section 151Section 250Section 69C

reassessment proceedings wereinitiated on 30.03.2021 beyond 4 years from the end of the relevant assessment year by issuing notice under Section 148 of the Act by making certain addition as in the case of the assessee. 4. Dissatisfied with the above order, the assessee went in appeal before the Learned ... various beneficiaries including assessee.The Learned Authorised Representative contended that this statement made by Mr. Sachet Saraf was subsequently retracted before issuance of notice under Section 148 of the Act. Therefore, the reassessment based on such a statement was unjustified. 6. On the other hand, the Learned Departmental Representative supported

Sharda Kanoria, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-30, Kolkata.

In the result, appeal of the assessee isallowed

ITA 797/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Accountant Member Shri Sonjoy Sarma (Judicial Member)

Section 139(1)Section 142(3)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

Officer reopen the case under Section 147 of the Act, after recording the reasons and obtaining the necessary approval from the PCIT, Delhi. Notice under Section 148 was issued on 30.03.2016. In response, the assessee requested the reasons of reopening the case which were provided on 24.06.2016 along with notice

Vivek Gangadhar Mehendale, Santacruz, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 22(3)(1), Piramal Chambers, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 2644/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Miss Padmavathy S.

For Appellant: ShriAnil SatheFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, SRDR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 54Section 54FSection 64(1)

claimed exemption under section 54F of the Act for purchasing the new flats by exploiting the sale consideration. The notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and assessment was framed under section 143(3) / 147 of the Act. As the assessee is not holding any property

Gemco International, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no order as to cost

ITA 410/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bhargava, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary,JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 153ASection 153C

applying the ratios of the above mentioned decisions, we are of the considered opinion that the assessing officer, has no jurisdiction to issue notice under section 148 of the Act to reopen the assessments in respect of those six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search ... option, but to issue notice and proceed thereafter to assess or reassess the total income. In the instant case, the assessing officer issued notice under section 148 to reopen the assessment. Therefore, in view of the non-obstante clause begin with section 153A, the assessing officer has no jurisdiction

Federation of Rajasthan Trade and Industry, Jaipur vs. ITO-Exemption Ward-2, Jaipur

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

ITA 217/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Pandya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh (Addl.CIT) a
Section 127Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

file response on or before 23-3-2022 Assessing Officer further passed an order under section 148A(d) on assessee and simultaneously issued notice under section 148 Whether since as per record notice under section 148A(b) was posted on 17-3-2022 and date fixed for response

Sandeep Jain, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/JPR/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Mudra (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)
Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 90

Sanddep Jain vs. DCIT the said two assessment years were filed beyond the period prescribed for making assessment, the Income-tax Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act and at the request of the petitioners treated the returns which were earlier filed as returns filed in response ... notice under section 148. It is urged on behalf of the Revenue that disclosure of income voluntarily and in good faith, as envisaged under sub-clauses (a) and (c) of sub-section (1), could be made only by filing a valid return and, if disclosure was not made

Ashok Kumar, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward- 1(1), Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5596/DEL/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Madhumita Royshri Ashok Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer, S/O Shri Sukhvir Singh, Ward-1(1) Ghaziabad (Up) Village – Mehroli, Post Cgo-1 Kamla Nehru Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad Nagar, Hapur Road, (U.P.) 201002 Ghaziabad (Up) 201002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Alxpk7744H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Adv. Respondent By : Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. D.R

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)

assessee made cash deposit of Rs.17,57,000/- in the saving bank account during the financial year 2008-09. After recording reasons notice under Section 148 of the Act has been issued on 10.03.2016 upon approval of the Ld. PCIT, Ghaziabad, which was served through affixture to the assessee ... First Appellate Authority. Hence, the instant appeal before us. 3. The case of the assessee before us is this that no notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 10.03.2016 was served upon the assessee. As service of such notice upon the assessee is the jurisdictional requirement, mandatory in nature

Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Jain, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 800/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 799 & 800/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Ito Jain Ward - 1(2)(3), Vs. 22 Jakorbal Chamber, Opp. Ahmedabad Madhubaug Panchkuwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abbpj6013E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. Dr 19/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.12.2023 & 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(4)Section 69A

facts in assuming jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act as the learned AO had not applied his mind before issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 1.3 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO has erred in law and facts in initiating reassessment proceedings

Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Jain, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-1(2)(3), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 799/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 799 & 800/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Ito Jain Ward - 1(2)(3), Vs. 22 Jakorbal Chamber, Opp. Ahmedabad Madhubaug Panchkuwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abbpj6013E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. Dr 19/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.12.2023 & 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249Section 249(4)Section 69A

facts in assuming jurisdiction under section 147 of the Act as the learned AO had not applied his mind before issuing notice under section 148 of the Act. 1.3 On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned AO has erred in law and facts in initiating reassessment proceedings

The DCIT, Gandhinagar Circle, Gandhinagar vs. M/S. Tourism Corporation of Gujarat Ltd., Gandhinagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 819/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.819/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2012-13 The Dcit M/S.Tourism Corporation Of बनाम/ Udhyog Bhavan, Sector-11 Gujarat Ltd. V/S. Gandhinagar Circle Block No.17, 4Th Floor Udyog Bhavan, Sector-11 Gandhinagar – 382 011 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaact 7252 J (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Heman, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 25/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 03/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Heman, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

31/12/2014. The assessment was later reopened under section 147 due to discrepancies identified by the AO. A notice under section 148 was issued on 22/09/2016, to which the assessee filed its return of income on 28/12/2016. 2.1. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO observed that the statutory auditors

Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 899/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Oct 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Circle 1(1), Ecospace, Campus 2B, 11F/12 Aayakar Bhavan, P-7, (Old Plot No. Aa Ii/Blk 3), Chowringhee Square, Vs New Town, Rajarhat, Kolkata - 700069 North 24 Paragans, Kolkata - 7000156 (Pan: Aaccs5491A) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Abhishek Sureka, Ar Respondent By : Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, Cit, Dr Shri Vineet Kumar, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.10.2024 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata-I, Kolkata (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Cit”) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Ays 2009-10 & 2013- 14, Dated 28.02.2018 & 13.03.2018 Respectively. Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of Vide This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity & Convenience. Mcnally Sayaji Engineering Limited.: Ays: 2009-10 & 2013-14 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Sureka, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, DR
Section 234CSection 250Section 37Section 40

inevitable conclusion that the reassessment action would not sustain. 23. We, accordingly, allow the instant writ petition and quash the impugned notice under Section 148 for A.Y. 2014-15 dated 31 March 2021. 5.2 In Uttam Value Steels Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income- tax [2024] 166 taxmann.com 493 (Bombay