Smt. Prabhati Devi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Dausa, Dausa

Parties Involved

Facts Summary

Smt. Prabhati Devi, an individual assessee, was issued a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, alleging that she had made a purchase of an immovable property jointly with others, resulting in an undisclosed income of Rs. 28,02,415/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) issued the notice on 27.03.2018, but it was not served on the assessee. The AO proceeded to frame an assessment under section 144 of the Act, making an addition of Rs. 28,02,415/- as income from undisclosed sources. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)) upheld the AO's order. The assessee appealed to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), arguing that the notice was not served, the approval of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) was irregular, and the AO did not apply any provisions of law while making the addition.…

Legal Issues

• 1. Whether the notice under section 148 was properly served on the assessee.
• 2. Whether the approval of the PCIT was proper.
• 3. Whether the AO applied any provisions of law while making the addition.

Judgment Outcome

Decided in favour of Partly Assessee / Partly Revenue.

Precedents Relied Upon

Similar Judgements

• Smt. Vimla Devi Meena vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Dausa, Dausa

  Jaipur bench

• Surinder Bhandari vs. ITO, Ward 2(3) Ghaziabad

  Delhi bench

• Sangeeta Devi Anchalia Vs. ITO

  Kolkata Bench benchAY 2013-14Allowed

• Audacious Dreams Foundation vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chennai

• Mr. Gulab Singh vs. The ITO

  Chandigarh bench

• Mahendrabhai Patel vs. ITO, Ward-3(3)(2) Ahmedabad

  Ahmedabad bench