SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
Vikram Bhatnagar – Appellant
Versus
Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax – Respondent


Table of Content
1. petitioner filed on behalf of deceased. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. scrutiny notice issued to deceased is invalid. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court reaffirmed previous ruling on notices. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. assessment order void due to incorrect issuance. (Para 12)
5. petition allowed; consequences addressed. (Para 13 , 14)

JUDGMENT

Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, J. (ORAL):

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing the assessment order dated 30th September, 2021 framed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (`the Act'), the consequential notice of demand under Section 156 of the Act, the notice initiating proceeding for levy of penalty under Section 270 A of the Act and lastly, the impugned notice dated 22nd September, 2019 issued under Section 143(2) of the Act for initiating scrutiny assessment proceedings in the case of Late Sh. Virendra Kumar Bhatnagar for Assessment Year (`AY') 2018-19.

2. The petitioner is the son of Late Sh. Virendra Kumar Bhatnagar (hereinafter referred to as the `deceased Assessee') who died on 10th March, 2018.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that upon demise of the Assessee, his son Sh. Vikram B

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top