← All Phrases

“Section 282(2)(b)”

Section References (mined)Section 282Section 282(2)(b)4 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 282(2)(b) is B. Johar Forest Works v. CIT (107 ITR 409), cited in 16 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 282(2)(b)

B. Johar Forest Works v. CIT
107 ITR 409 · 1977 · Reported
16
citing judgments

For an assessee to be considered in default, a notice must be served in one of the modes provided by the Income Tax Act. Acquiring knowledge of a notice's issuance is not a substitute for proper service.

CIT v. Shital Prasad Kharag Prasad
280 ITR 541 · 2006 · High Court
16
citing judgments

Service of notice at a place other than the assessee's registered address violates assessment procedure and renders the notice invalid.

Judgments citing Section 282(2)(b)

Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs. M/S Soverign Commercial P. Ltd

The appeals are allowed with costs of Rs

ITA - 164 / 2002HC Delhi22 Feb 2016
Section 260A

Rattan Gupta & Co. by refusal of registered posts “did not amount to service of notices on the company”. It was held that “under Section 282(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act notice is required to be served in the case of a company on its principal officer”. Since

Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs. M/S Swastik Commercial P. Ltd

The appeals are allowed with costs of Rs

ITA - 165 / 2002HC Delhi22 Feb 2016
Section 260A

Rattan Gupta & Co. by refusal of registered posts “did not amount to service of notices on the company”. It was held that “under Section 282(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act notice is required to be served in the case of a company on its principal officer”. Since

Commissioner of Income Tax Del vs. M/S Trishul Commercial P. Ltd

The appeals are allowed with costs of Rs

ITA - 167 / 2002HC Delhi22 Feb 2016
Section 260A

Rattan Gupta & Co. by refusal of registered posts “did not amount to service of notices on the company”. It was held that “under Section 282(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act notice is required to be served in the case of a company on its principal officer”. Since

Commissioner of Income Tax- Delhi vs. M/S Pasupati Nath Commr. P. Ltd

The appeals are allowed with costs of Rs

ITA - 168 / 2002HC Delhi22 Feb 2016
Section 260A

Rattan Gupta & Co. by refusal of registered posts “did not amount to service of notices on the company”. It was held that “under Section 282(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act notice is required to be served in the case of a company on its principal officer”. Since