Back
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH)
Ravish Sood, J, Omkareshwar Chidara, Accountant Member
Arimilli Rama Krishna – Appellant
Versus
ACIT, Circle – 1 – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. reassessment initiated under section 147/148 after initial assessment and revision. (Para 6) |
| 2. deemed dividend addition under section 2(22)(e) upheld by cit(a). (Para 7) |
| 3. assessee challenges jurisdiction due to delayed section 143(2) notice. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. tribunal examines necessity of section 143(2) notice in reassessment. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. section 143(2) notice mandatory for return filed under section 148. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. judicial precedents affirm mandatory section 143(2) issuance. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 7. section 292bb does not cure delayed section 143(2) notice. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 8. assessment quashed for invalid jurisdiction due to delayed notice. (Para 21 , 22 , 23) |
आदेश/ORDER
PER RAVISH SOOD, JM:
The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, dated 18.09.2025, which in turn arises from the order passed by the Assessing Officer (for short, “A.O”) under section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the (for short, “the Act”), dated 30.12.2019 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. The assessee has assailed the impugned order on the following grounds of appeal bef
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
