← All Phrases

“Section 189(3)”

Section References (mined)Section 189Section 189(3)7 judgments

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 67/JODH/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 May 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Lodha (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 148Section 154Section 189(3)Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 292BSection 42

appellant whereas other legal heir\nomitted for liability without any reason whatsoever.\n4. That the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in relying section 189(3) of the Act. It is\nsubmitted that sub-section instead of supporting the respondent, supports the stand of\nthe assessee. It is clearly provided ... neither served upon\nthe assessee firm bearing PAN AABFK2499L thereupon nor validly issued upon\nthe legal representatives in terms of section 189(3) of the Act. Thus, there was no\nservice of notice of the firm.\n1.9 It is also held in the case of Savita Kapila v. ACIT

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 66/JODH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 May 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Lodha (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 148Section 154Section 189(3)Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 292BSection 42

appellant whereas other legal heir\nomitted for liability without any reason whatsoever.\n4. That the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in relying section 189(3) of the Act. It is\nsubmitted that sub-section instead of supporting the respondent, supports the stand of\nthe assessee. It is clearly provided ... neither served upon\nthe assessee firm bearing PAN AABFK2499L thereupon nor validly issued upon\nthe legal representatives in terms of section 189(3) of the Act. Thus, there was no\nservice of notice of the firm.\n1.10 It is also held in the case of Savita Kapila v. ACIT

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 65/JODH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 May 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Lodha (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 148Section 154Section 189(3)Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 292BSection 42

appellant whereas other legal heir\nomitted for liability without any reason whatsoever.\n4. That the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in relying section 189(3) of the Act. It is\nsubmitted that sub-section instead of supporting the respondent, supports the stand of\nthe assessee. It is clearly provided ... neither served upon\nthe assessee firm bearing PAN AABFK2499L thereupon nor validly issued upon\nthe legal representatives in terms of section 189(3) of the Act. Thus, there was no\nservice of notice of the firm.\n1.10 It is also held in the case of Savita Kapila v. ACIT

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 64/JODH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 May 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Lodha (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 148Section 154Section 189(3)Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 292BSection 42

appellant whereas other legal heir\nomitted for liability without any reason whatsoever.\n4. That the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in relying section 189(3) of the Act. It is\nsubmitted that sub-section instead of supporting the respondent, supports the stand of\nthe assessee. It is clearly provided ... neither served upon\nthe assessee firm bearing PAN AABFK2499L thereupon nor validly issued upon\nthe legal representatives in terms of section 189(3) of the Act. Thus, there was no\nservice of notice of the firm.\n1.9\nIt is also held in the case of Savita Kapila v. ACIT

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 63/JODH/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 May 2025AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Lodha (CA)For Respondent: Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 148Section 154Section 189(3)Section 234ASection 234CSection 250Section 292BSection 42

appellant whereas other legal heir\nomitted for liability without any reason whatsoever.\n4. That the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in relying section 189(3) of the Act. It is\nsubmitted that sub-section instead of supporting the respondent, supports the stand of\nthe assessee. It is clearly provided ... neither served upon\nthe assessee firm bearing PAN AABFK2499L thereupon nor validly issued upon\nthe legal representatives in terms of section 189(3) of the Act. Thus, there was no\nservice of notice of the firm.\n1.10 It is also held in the case of Savita Kapila v. ACIT

MANOHARS CATERING ,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(2)(3), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1393/BANG/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Mrs. Beena Pillai & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2008-09 Manohars Catering, Assistant Commissioner Of Income-Tax & / Or The Partners/ Circle-1, Bangalore Legal Representatives Of (Present Jurisdiction-Income Tax The Partners Of Manohars Officer-Ward7(2)(3), Bangalore) Catering As Stipulated U/S V. 189(1), 189(3) & 189(4) Of The 1961 Act Number 666, Indiranagar 1St Stage Bengaluru-560038 Karnataka Pan:Aalfm1212B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Raghvendra, Ca Revenue By: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.09.2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Sh. Raghvendra, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, JCIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 246A(1)(a)Section 250Section 37Section 40

Manohars Catering assessee is a partnership firm, and Reference is drawn to Section 189(1), which is relevant. Similarly Section 189(3) provides that in case the firm is dissolved or business discontinued, every person who has at the time of such discontinuance or dissolution a partner of the firm

REAL CARGO MUMBAI,ARVALLI vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, MODASA

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

ITA 268/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad. This Appeal In Ita No.268/Ahd/2024 For Assessment Year 2010-11, Is Filed By The Assessee Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Division Bench, Ahmedabad Has Arisen From The Appellate Order Dated 25.09.2023 Passed By Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax(Appeals), Nfac, Delhi U/S. 250 Of The Income- Tax Act,1961 , Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023- 24/1056508501(1), Which Has In Turn Arisen From The Assessment Order Dated 18.12.2018 Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S. 143(3) Read With Section 254 Of The Income-Tax Act 1961. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee In Memo Of Appeal Filed With The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad , Reads As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri S.N.Divatia ,Advocate & ShriFor Respondent: Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav,CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 189(1)Section 250Section 253(3)Section 254Section 40

compliance of Section 176(3). The assessee is a partnership firm, and Reference is drawn to Section 189(1), which is relevant. Similarly Section 189(3) provides that in case the firm is dissolved or business discontinued, every person who has at the time of such discontinuance or dissolution