Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 118 (2.83 seconds)
Documents citing Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 15 December, 2004

M/S Manish Finlease (P) Ltd, Patna vs Ito, Ward-2(1), Patna on 9 August, 2019

In Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT (supra) it was reiterated that service of valid notice under Section 148 was "the foundation for the initiation of reassessment proceedings and a condition precedent for the validity of the notice." It was held that the Tribunal was not right in holding that the notices under Section 148 addressed as „SCR and the karta „S were valid notices for reassessing the income of the HUF „MM or „MS or its successors. Onus on Revenue to prove service of notice. There is sufficient judicial authority for the proposition that the burden of showing that service of noticed has been effected on the Assessee or his duly authorized representative is on the Revenue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Patna Cites 68 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

M/S Bandanthamma Mathu Kalamma Trust, ... vs Income Tax Officer Ward-1(4), Mysore on 26 February, 2020

[iii] It is further submitted that a valid notice is sine qua non for assumption of a valid jurisdiction and subsequent proceedings. Reliance is placed on the parity of reasoning of the decision of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh Vs. CIT, reported in [206] 280 ITR 396.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 51 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

V3S Infratech Ltd., New Delhi vs Acit, New Delhi on 21 May, 2019

We have examined the decision in Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh (supra) and would observe that facts were peculiar. There was oral partition of the Hindu undivided family, M/s Munna Lal Moti Lal, on death of the 'Karta' Moti Lal. Capital was divided amongst three brothers, who were the coparceners. Controversy was regarding legality of oral partition that was not recognized by the Revenue. Re-assessment notices were issued, in the name of M/s Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh, Karta Shri Nath. 'Nil' return was filed along with letter stating that no business was conducted in the name of the assessee and notices were wrongly issued. Revenue had asserted that this notice was meant to assess M/s Munna Lal Moti Lal though the notice was to another assessee, who was also existing in law. Recording this factual matrix, the notice under Section 148 and assessments made were held to be invalid.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 32 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Commissioner Of Income Tax (Central)-I vs Chetan Gupta on 15 September, 2015

In Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT (supra) it was reiterated that service of valid notice under Section 148 was "the foundation for the initiation of reassessment proceedings and a condition precedent for the validity of the notice." It was held that the Tribunal was not right in holding that the notices under Section 148 addressed as „SCR‟ and the karta „S‟ were valid notices for reassessing the income of the HUF „MM‟ or „MS‟ or its successors.
Delhi High Court Cites 40 - Cited by 11 - S Muralidhar - Full Document

Smt.Dr.V.Gourisri,, Nalgonda vs Department Of Income Tax on 23 April, 2014

survey. It is also a fact that assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act accepting the income declared without any variation. Unless actual concealment of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income is found from the return of income, penalty cannot be imposed. As the assessee has made complete disclosure of income in the revised return and the Assessing Officer has also accepted such income, provisions of sec. 271(1)( c) will not be attracted as imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c ) can only be considered on the basis of income tax return. The allegation of the Assessing Officer that but for the survey, assessee otherwise would not have disclosed the income cannot be the sole basis for imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)©. May be explanation 5 and 5A may extend the scope of 'concealed income' identified in search operation but there is no such provision/explanation u/s 271(1)(c ) for proceedings u/s 133A so as to consider the income admitted in course of survey subsequently declared in the return of income in due course, as concealed income. It may be noted that in case of Suresh Chandra Mittal vs. CIT (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has affirmed the view held by the Hon'ble M.P. High Court that when income declared by the assessee is accepted no penalty can be imposed u/s 271(1)© of the Act. Further, it is very much evident that during the survey operation, the assessee and her husband were asked to pay taxes of Rs.30 lakhs. On the suggestions of the department assessee and her husband paid the taxes by declaring corresponding income spread over assessment years 2005- 06 to 2007-08.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Vedanta Limited, New Delhi vs Acit, Circle-26(2), New Delhi on 24 December, 2020

15. Likewise, in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh Vs. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 396, the Allahabad High Court held that the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is a condition precedent to the validity of any assessment order to be passed under section 147 of the Act and when such a notice is not issued and assessment made, such a 13 ITA No. 9495/Del/2019 Vedanta Ltd.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 26 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Late S.Suresh Legal Heir By S.Mahesh , ... vs Income Tax Officer, Ward-15(1), ... on 22 February, 2021

In the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of Spice Entertainment Ltd., one of the questions, which fell for consideration, is as to whether such framing of assessment against a non existing entity or a dead person could be brought within the ambit of Section 292B of the Act and after referring to the decisions on the point including the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh v. CIT [reported in (2006) 280 ITR 396], it has been held that the provisions of Section 292B of the Act are not applicable and that framing of assessment against a non existing entity/person goes to the root of the matter, which is not a procedural irregularity, but a jurisdictional defect, as there cannot be any assessment against a dead person."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Asst Cit 8(2)(1), Mumbai vs Siemens Information Processing ... on 31 July, 2019

15. Likewise, in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh Vs. CIT (2006) 280 ITR 396, the Allahabad High Court held that the issue of notice under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act is a condition precedent to the validity of any assessment order to be passed under section 147 of the Act and when such a notice is not issued and assessment made, such a defect cannot be treated as cured under Section 292B of the Act. The Court observed that this provisions condones the invalidity which arises merely by mistake, defect or omission in a notice, if in substance and effect it is in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act. Since no valid notice was served on the assessee to reassess the income, all the consequent proceedings were null and void and it was not a case of irregularity. Therefore, Section 292B of the Act had no application.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 68 - Cited by 40 - Full Document

Income Tax Officer Ward 5(3)(2), Mumbai vs Shreepati Infra Realty Limited, Mumbai on 30 January, 2019

15. Likewise, in the case of Sri Nath Suresh Chand Ram Naresh vs. CIT (2005) 196 CTR (All) 416: (2006) 280 ITR 396 (All), the Allahabad High Court held that the issue of notice under s. 148 of the IT Act is a condition precedent to the validity of any assessment order to be passed under s. 147 of the Act and when such a notice is not issued and assessment made, such a defect cannot be treated as cured under s. 292B of the Act. The Court observed that this provision condones the invalidity which arises merely by mistake, defect or omission in a notice, if in substance and 22 ITA s No . 4 13 3 & 4 61 0 / Mu m/ 2 01 7 effect it is in conformity with or according to the intent and purpose of this Act. Since no valid notice was served on the assessee to reassess the income, all the consequent proceedings were null and void and it was not a case of irregularity. Therefore, s. 292B of the Act had no application.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 23 - Cited by 23 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next