Section 282 of the Income Tax Act

Income-tax Act, 2025: s.501

Section 282 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 corresponds to section 501 (Service of notice, generally) of the Income-tax Act, 2025.

Read section 501 of the 2025 Act

Correspondence checked against the ICAI tabular mapping of the two Acts and the BharatTax.co section commentary.

The decision most relied on for Section 282 is Pr. CIT v. Silver Line (383 ITR 455), cited in 201 of the 613 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 282

Pr. CIT v. Silver Line
383 ITR 455 · 2016 · High Court
201
citing judgments

For reassessment under Section 147, the Assessing Officer must record reasons and communicate them to the assessee. An assessee's participation in proceedings pursuant to a Section 148 notice does not obviate the mandatory requirement of recording and communicating reasons or issuing a Section 143(2) notice.

CIT v. Chetan Gupta
382 ITR 613 · 2016 · High Court
57
citing judgments

Reassessment proceedings and subsequent assessment orders are invalid if the notice under Section 148 is not validly served, such as when issued to an incorrect address or when affixture is improper.

CIT v. Ramendra Nath Ghosh
82 ITR 888 · 1971 · Supreme Court
42
citing judgments

For substituted service of notice by affixation to be valid, the serving officer must exercise all due and reasonable diligence to find the assessee or their agent, strictly adhering to the procedure under Rule 17 of Order V of the Civil Procedure Code. Failure to follow this proper procedure renders the service invalid and cannot sustain subsequent proceedings.

B.K Gooyee v. CIT
62 ITR 109 · 1966 · High Court
26
citing judgments

A notice issued under section 34 of the Income-tax Act, 1922, that is not signed by the Income Tax Officer is invalid and considered no notice at all, as the signature is an essential and integral part of the notice.

CIT v. Naveen Chander
323 ITR 49 · 2010 · High Court
21
citing judgments

Service of notice by affixture is invalid if it is not done in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Code of Civil Procedure, specifically requiring the association of an independent local person.

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.

PCIT v. Broadway Shoe Co.
99 Taxmann.com 83 · 2018 · Reported
15
citing judgments

When no return is filed in response to a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, a separate notice under section 143(2) is not required to make the assessment.

Ashish Plastic Industries v. ACIT
373 ITR 451 · Reported
14
citing judgments

An assessee must be allowed credit for income surrendered and disclosed in another year or by another group assessee to avoid impermissible double taxation.

Dy. CIT v. Oman International Bank SAOG
100 ITD 2185 · 2006 · ITAT
9
citing judgments
APJ Abdul Kalam Education and Welfare Trust v. CIT (Exemption)
171 Taxmann.com 569 · 2025 · Reported
7
citing judgments

Judgments on Section 282

M/S J.C.Motors & General Finance Co Ltd, Kolkata vs. C.I.T Kolkata - I, Kolkata

In the result, all the appeals are dismissed

ITA 1047/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Nov 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Jm Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S.J.C.Motor & General Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Finance Co.Ltd. Ltd., 6A, Kolkata-I, Aayakarbhawan, P- Clive Row, 4Th Floor,Room 7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata No.6/12, Kolkata-700001. – 700 069. Pan : Aaccj 1816 G Assessment Year : 2008-09 M/S. Uphar Realtors Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 71, Metcalfe Street, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-I, Aayakarbhawan, Kolkata – 700013. P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Pan : Aaacu 9639 E Assessment Year 2009-10 M/S. Tejaswani Goods Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., 84/3, Panchantalla Kolkata-I, Aayakarbhawan, Road, 2Nd Floor, Liluah, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Howrah-711 204. Kolkata – 700 069. Pan : Aadct 1156 A Assessment Year 2008-09 M/S. Shark Vanijya Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., Room No.402, 4Th Kolkata-I, Aayakar Bhawan, Floor, 127, N.S.Road, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700001. Kolkata – 700 069. Pan : Aalcs 2837 H Assessment Year 2010-11 M/S. Gannet Vintrade Pvt. Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd., Rajesh Mohan & Kolkata-Ii, Aayakarbhawan, Associates, Bagati House, 5Th P-7, Chowringhee Square, Floor, Unit No.18, 34, Kolkata – 700 069. Ganesh Chandra Avenue, Kolkata-700013. Pan : Aadcg 4706 H (Appellants) (Respondents) Assessee By : S.M.Surana, Advocate Department By : S.Srivastava, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 04&5.11.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 05 .11.2015 Order Through This Batch Of Appeals, Different Assessees Assail The Correctness Of Separate Orders Passed By The Commissioners Of Income-

For Appellant: S.M.Surana, AdvocateFor Respondent: S.Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 68