Singhal Industries Vs. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Singhal Industries vs income Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Rajasthan Decided Nov 15, 2002

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/771891

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/771891
Court: Rajasthan High Court
Judge: Y.R. Meena and; G.S. Misra, JJ.
Decided On: Nov 15, 2002
Case Number: IT Appeal No. 144 of 2002
Subject: Direct Taxation

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Direct Taxation
Acts & sections: Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 119, 143(2) and 260A

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Singhal Industries

Advocate R.P. Garg, Adv.

Respondent

income Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.

Legal References

Acts: Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 119, 143(2) and 260A
Reported In: (2004)187CTR(Raj)41

Excerpt

- 1. heard learned counsel for the appellant. considering his submissions, the appeal is admitted in terms of the following questions.:'whether the cbdt instruction no. 1942, dt. 11th july, 1997, is an instruction issued under section 119 of the it act, 1961?''whether the notice under section 143(2) issued by the assessing authority is against instructions of cbdt was illegal and as such the assessment framed thereupon and further orders issued are annulled/void?'2. issue notice to the other side. notices be made returnable within six weeks. paper book be filed within 3 months.3. heard learned counsel for the appellant on the stay application also.4. considering his submissions, no case in made out for staying the operation of the order dt. 28th march, 2002, passed by the income-tax appellate tribunal, jaipur bench, jaipur. consequently the stay application is rejected.5. list the appeal itself for hearing after 3 months.

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant. Considering his submissions, the appeal is admitted in terms of the following questions.:

'Whether the CBDT Instruction No. 1942, dt. 11th July, 1997, is an instruction issued under Section 119 of the IT Act, 1961?'

'Whether the notice under Section 143(2) issued by the assessing authority is against Instructions of CBDT was illegal and as such the assessment framed thereupon and further orders issued are annulled/void?'

2. Issue notice to the other side. Notices be made returnable within six weeks. Paper book be filed within 3 months.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant on the stay application also.

4. Considering his submissions, no case in made out for staying the operation of the order dt. 28th March, 2002, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur. Consequently the stay application is rejected.

5. List the appeal itself for hearing after 3 months.

Same Court & Year Rajasthan · 2002 Same Parties Singhal Industries vs income Tax Appellate Tribunal and ors. Same Subject Direct Taxation Same Judge Y.R. Meena and; G.S. Misra, JJ. Acts & Sections Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 119, 143(2) and 260A

Direct Taxation