← 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

Mohamed Hussain Mahamed Harisai, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-5(5), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 654/CHNY/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. Nos.654 & 655/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Mohamed Hussain Mohamed Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Harissi, 10, Nethaji Nagar, Iind Street Non Corporate Ward 5(5), Tondiarpet, Chennai 600 081. Chennai 600 006. [Pan:Apepm2204H] (Petitioner By) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Petitioner By : Shri N. Arjunraj, Ca For Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 10, Chennai Both Dated 01.03.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2010- 11 & 2011-12. 2. Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Time Barred By 277 Days Delay In Filing The Appeals Before The Tribunal. By Filing Condonation Petition In Support Of An Affidavit, The Assessee Has Explained As Under:

For Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

made in SB account with M/s. ICICI Bank Ltd. during 3 I.T.A. Nos.654 & 655/Chny/19 the financial year 2009-10 as per AIR information. Notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] was issued on the assessee on 31.07.2014. Notice under section

The Peria Karamalai Tea & Produce Co.Ltd., Coimbatore vs. The DCIT, Corporate Circle-1, Coimbatore

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

ITA 189/CHNY/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)Section 80I

vide letter dated 09.08.2018 by the AO, vide his letter the reasons supplied were as under:- “The reason for issue of notice under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for both the assessment years is that as per information contained in form 10CCB the initial year from which

Mamta Lalit Jain, Thane vs. ITO WD 1(2), Kalyan

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1626/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Dec 2022AY 2012-13
Section 131Section 147

section 151 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In view o the above facts, it is requested that kind approval for issue of notice under section 148 in this case for the A.Y. 2012- 13 may be accorded, if approved. Place : Kalyan (RAKESH KUMAR) Date 12.03.2019 Income-tax Officer, Ward

Rupesh Bahilal Sharma, Mumbai vs. ITO 23 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 6983/MUM/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Dec 2022AY 2005-06
Section 131Section 132Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69

11/08/2005 which was duly processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Later, his assessment was sought to be reopened by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act based on some information received from DDIT(Inv.), Mumbai on the basis of search and seizure action in the case

Sudar Industries Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC- 5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 4049/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta
Section 143(2)Section 148Section 14ASection 250

action of the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax Central Circle-5(2), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer) in issuing notice under sections 148 of the Act. The appellants contend that the CIT(A) ought not to have upheld the action of the Assessing Officer inasmuch ... office premises of Dr. Datsons Labs Ltd., proceedings under section 147 were initiated in the case of the assessee, and accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 19/02/2016. In response to notice under section 148 of the Act, the assessee filed its return of income

Venkatesan Ravi, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle-7(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2388/CHNY/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2388/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Venkatesan Ravi, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of 14A, Balu Nagar, Mogappair East, Income Tax, Chennai 600 037. Non Corporate Circle 7(1), Chennai – 34. [Pan:Adwpr8864L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri V.S. Jayakumar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 29.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 7, Chennai Dated 25.06.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Only Ground Raised By The Assessee Before The Tribunal Is That “The Assessing Officer Ought To Have Been Passed Assessment Order Under Section 153C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] & Not Under Section 144 R.W.S. 147 Of The Act. The Issue Raised

For Appellant: Shri V.S. Jayakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 153C

Under these facts and circumstances of the case, the Assessing Officer has reopened the assessment under section 147 of the Act and issued notice under section 148 of the Act and thereafter, 4 I.T.A. No. 2388/Chny/19 the assessment was completed under section 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated

Shailesh D. Shah, Mumbai vs. PCIT-17, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1561/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 283

filed for the assessment year 2012–13. Accordingly, based on the above information, proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 28/03/2019. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the cash deposits made in his savings account

Shailesh D. Shah, Mumbai vs. PCIT -17, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1560/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Prabhat Kumar Gupta
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 283

filed for the assessment year 2012–13. Accordingly, based on the above information, proceedings under section 147 of the Act were initiated and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued on 28/03/2019. During the reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the cash deposits made in his savings account

Kiran Kishormal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO 20(2)(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 2127/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Harsh Kapadia a/wFor Respondent: Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Anand
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

deposited to the tune of Rs. 77,30,25,000, into the bank account in the name of assessee’s proprietary concern. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 29/03/2019. Thereafter, the notices under section 142(1) of the Act dated 05/10/2019 ... disposed of by the AO vide order dated 27/12/2019. Since the assessee has not filed return of income and not complied with the notice under section 148 of the Act, and the assessee has not furnished any of the requisite details such as income, sales register, purchase register, stock

Progressive Currency Bazaar P Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4403/MUM/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Ashok BansalFor Respondent: Ms. Smita Nair
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 292

assessee is one of the beneficiaries of these fictitious profits and losses, which has been transferred to reduce its tax liability. Accordingly, notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee on 29/03/2016. In response thereto, the assessee requested that the return originally filed be treated ... return filed in response to notice under section 148 of the Act. The assessee also filed its objections against the initiation of reassessment proceedings. The said objections were disposed off vide order dated 19/05/2016. Thereafter, notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued to the assessee on 19/12/2016

Sikkanthar Shah Jahan, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward-12(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 483/CHNY/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.483/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 Shri Sikkanthar Shah Jahan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 14, Iv Line, Sr Towers, North Non-Corporate Ward 12(1), Beach Road, Chennai 600 001. Chennai [Pan:Aazps2263A] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri K.G. Raghunath, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri R. Boopathi, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 13, Chennai Dated 03.08.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2010-11. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By 511 Days Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal. In The Form Of An Affidavit, The Assessee Has Filed Petition For Condonation Of Delay, Wherein, Following Submissions Were Made: “3. I Humbly State Before The Honourable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, That The Filing Of Appeal Before The Honourable Income Tax Appellate

For Appellant: Shri K.G. Raghunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Boopathi, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 68

income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short], notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued on 31.03.2017 and the assessee has furnished return of income on 08.11.2017 declaring total income

ITO, Corp Ward -6(4), Chennai vs. Sri Kumaran Wind Energy Pvt Ltd, Chennai

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

ITA 3373/CHNY/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3373/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2008-09 The Income Tax Officer, Vs. M/S. Sri Kumaran Wind Corporate Ward– 6(4), Energy Pvt. Ltd., No. 3, Chennai – 600 034. Manali Express Road, Tkp Nagar, Chennai 600 019. [Pan: Aajcs6450L] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Boopathi, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-16, Chennai, Dated 28.09.2018 For The Assessment Year 2008-09. The Only Issue Involved In This Appeal Is Relating To Deletion Of Addition Made Of Interest Payment For ₹.1,46,74,910/- By Admitting Additional Evidence Is In Violation Of Rule 46A Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Its Return Of 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Boopathi, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

interest needs to be disallowed. Accordingly, the assessment was reopened under section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] and notice under section 148 of the Act has been issued. The reasons for reopening were also communicated to the assessee. The assessee was also given a final

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2698/CHNY/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2697/CHNY/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2696/CHNY/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2695/CHNY/2018[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2694/CHNY/2018[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course

Gayathri Devi Vyas, D.Srinivas Vyas Manohar Vyas Vijay Shri Legal Heirs of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2693/CHNY/2018[1998-99]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 1998-99

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course

D.Srinivas Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2692/CHNY/2018[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course

D.Srinivas Vyas, Chennai vs. ITO Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by both the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2691/CHNY/2018[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Nov 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2691 & 2692/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2001-02 & 2002-03 Shri D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, No. 1, D Block, Eashwaran Koil Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Street, West Mambalam, Chennai. Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Abvpv4760G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2693, 2694, 2695, 2696, 2697 & 2698/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:1998-99, 99-2000, 2000-01, 2001-02, 2002-03 & 2003-04 Gayathri Devi Vyas, D. Srinivas Vyas, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Manohar Vyas, Vijay Shri, Legal Heirs Non Corporate Ward 12(5), Of Late Shri Durga Das Vyas, No. 1, D Chennai. Block, Eashwaran Koil Street, West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. [Pan:Adapv2591C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate & Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 23.11.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.11.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Appeals Filed By The Two Different Assessees Are Directed Against The Respective Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax

For Appellant: Shri N.V. Balaji, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 271(1)(c)

escaped assessment and hence, the assessment for the assessment year 2001-02 was reopened under section 147 of the Act and notice under section 148 of the Act was issued and the 5 I.T.A. No.2691 & 2692/Chny/18 & 2693 to 2698/Chny/18 Assessing Officer proceeded with the re-assessment proceedings. During the course