CIT v. Rajasthan Financial Corporation

134 CTR 145High Court1996#6055 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2021 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBE Section 133A Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263 Section 69 Section 69D

Issues it is cited on

inadequate enquiry prejudicial to interest of revenue lack of enquiry malabar industrial revision u/s 263 section 56(2)(viib)section 263(1)assessment order erroneous revision under section 263 change of opinion source of source erroneous and prejudicial

Judgments citing CIT v. Rajasthan Financial Corporation

SAGAR JEWELLERS,PORBANDAR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), JAMNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 222/RJT/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Jan 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.222/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: (2019-20) (Hybrid Hearing) Sagar Jewellers Vs. Dcit Zaveri Bazar, Porbandar, Gujarat Circle-2(1), Jamnagar 360575 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adbfs5410L (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri K. C. Thaker, Ar Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/01/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini, Am: By Way Of This Appeal, The Assessee Has Challenged The Correctness Of The Order Passed By The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (In Short ‘The Pcit’), Under Section 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’), Dated 21.02.2024, For The Assessment Year (In Short ‘A.Y.’) 2019-20. 2. The Grievances Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows:

For Appellant: Shri K. C. Thaker, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT.DR

Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(3)Section 263Section 69

…able basis of reaching satisfaction by a quasi- judicial authority. Thus, the assessing officer did all what he was supposed to do under law and took a possible view Further It is not a case of lack of inquiry In CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: "Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

ROOP KUMAR CHOPRA,JAIPUR vs. PCIT JAIPUR 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 264/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Him By The Assessee In Compliance To The Notice Notices Issued To Him U/S 142(1) As Well As U/S 143(2) Of The Act By The Ao As Erroneous In So Far As It Is Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue For The Purpose Of Section 263 Of The Act & Consequently Setting Aside The Assessment Order Passed Dated 01-01-2021 To Be Made Afresh Made Is Most Arbitrarily, Unjust, Untenable & Liable To Be Vacated.’’

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT

Section 142(1)Section 142(2)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 57

…ntive material in possession of such higher authority that has not been considered by ld. AO while forming such opinion.Reliance is placed on the following decisions: - 11 ROOP KUMAR CHOPRA VS PR. CIT-1, JAIPUR CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

SOURABH SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. PCIT,JAIPUR-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 240/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar (CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 263

…ecause he has a different opinion in matter; it is only in case of 'lack of inquiry' that such a cause of action can be open. However, the ld. CIT is completely silent on this aspect. Supporting Case laws: 6.1 In CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

A3LOGICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR -1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 190/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur27 Sept 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Ajay Malik (CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 263Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 40a

…or not making proper inquiries. Otherwise also he has not suggested what further inquiries could and should have been made in the admitted facts and circumstances of the present case. Supporting Case laws: 4.1 In CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

JAI INTERNATIONAL,UDAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 23/JODH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur26 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: The Date Of Hearing. 4. That The Hon’Ble Pcit Has Not Given Any Specific Instance About Rejecting The Details Submitted By Us In Response To Their Query. 5. That The Hon’Ble Pcit Has Not Given Any Specific Reason/Speaking Order Contradicting Case Laws Submitted By Us. The Hon’Ble Pcit Only Says That The Facts Are Different.”

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 40A(2)(b)

…it was held that if neither the query nor the answers were reflected in the assessment order, this would not by itself lead to the conclusion that the order of the AO calls for interference and revision. Also in CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) the high court upheld that the tribunal decision was justified in holding that there was no 13 Jai International, Udaipur error prejudicial to revenue for the CIT to invoke his powers u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. Where two views are possible and the Income-tax Officer has taken one view with which the Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be…

GAYATRI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 405/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Sept 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT-DR

Section 127Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ully established that the AO has 12 SMT. GAYATRI DEVI VS PR.CIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR acted completely in accordance with the law and what he was supposed to do i.r.t. the issue in hand. Supporting Case laws: 8.1 In CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

LAXMI NARAYAN AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-2, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 296/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Aug 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT) a

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…263 cannot be invoked for making short enquiries or to go into the process of assessment again and again merely on the basis that more enquiry ought to have been conducted to find something. 8.6 On this issue in CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to b…

DINESH KUMAR CHAURASIA, TONK vs. PCIT CENTRAL, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 102/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 5

…and legal aspects and the judicial guideline has fully established that the AO has acted completely in accordance with the law and what he was supposed to do i.r.t. the issue in hand. Supporting Case laws: 7.1 In CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

PARSHAVNATH BUILDERS ,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 284/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri MahendraGargieya ,Adv. &For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT

Section 143(3)Section 263

…he available judicial guideline. Hence, it cannot be said that the impugned assessment order was erroneous and therefore prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, for want of enquiry by the AO. 2.4 Kindly refer CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj).held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AJMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION)/ ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR / JODHPUR

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 89/JODH/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur22 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

…and, available on the day when he passed the Assessment Order dated 12.12.2019 which is binding decision of Hon'ble ITAT Jaipur, could have assessed the income at Nil. 3.7 Supporting Case Laws: 3.7.1 Kindly refer CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj). held that: "Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to b…

SHRI KESHORAIPATAN SAHKARI SUGAR MILLS LIMITED,KOTA vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 208/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Sh. James Kurian (CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80P(2)(d)

…risdiction u/s 263 cannot be invoked for making short enquiries or to go into the process of assessment again and again merely on the basis that more enquiry ought to have been conducted to find something. 1.4 In CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

RAJENDRA AND URSULA JOSHI HOLDINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JAIPUR

In the result both the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 192/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Birla (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 143(3)Section 263

…on the ground of inadequacy of enquiry— Order passed by the CIT was not sustainable in law hence, the Tribunal rightly set aside the impugned order of the CIT 13. Supporting Case Laws on S. 263: 13.1 Kindly refer CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj). held that: “Once AO has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the AO cannot be held to be erroneous simply because in…

RAJENDRA AND URSULA JOSHI FOOD INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOMETAX-1, JAIPUR

ITA 191/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Us On The Following Grounds In This Appeal;

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Birla (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

…ner to revise each and every order, if in his (subjective) opinion, same has been passed without making enquiries or verification which should have been made. 12. Supporting Case Laws on S. 263: 12.1 Kindly refer CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj). held that: “Once AO has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the AO cannot be held to be erroneous simply because in…

RAJENDRA AND URSULA JOSHI SKILL DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, JAIPUR

In the result both the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 190/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sh. Deepak Birla (C.A.) &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT) a

Section 143(3)Section 263

REKHA SHEKHAWAT,KOTA vs. PR.CIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7/JPR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Aug 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanajy Dhariwal, CIT

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271A

…risdiction u/s 263 cannot be invoked for making short enquiries or to go into the process of assessment again and again merely on the basis that more enquiry ought to have been conducted to find something. 1.4 In CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj) held that: "Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explanation of assessee, the decision of the Assessing Officer cannot be held to be…

M/S RAJENDRA AND URSULA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. ITA 57/JPR/2021 is also stands dismissed

ITA 57/JPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Mehar (CIT)

Section 263Section 5

…should have been made. As submitted above here also the AO having already applied its mind (directly or indirectly), the assessment order was not erroneous. 11. Supporting Case Laws on S. 263: 11.1 Kindly refer CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj). (DPB) held that: 36 M/s Rajendra and Ursula Joshi Skill Development Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Pr. CIT, Jaipur "Once AO has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the explana…

M/S RAJENDRA AND URSULA JOSHI SKILL DEVELOPEMENT PVT. LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. ITA 57/JPR/2021 is also stands dismissed

ITA 56/JPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 May 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Mehar (CIT)

Section 263Section 5

RAMESHWAR PRASAD SHRINGI,GUMANPURA vs. PR.CIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 10/JPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.) &For Respondent: Sh. B. K. Gupta (Pr. CIT)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…wal amount elsewhere—Said withdrawal is duly reflected in the cash flow statement and closing cash balance is more than the amount found at the time of search—Thus, addition cannot be sustained” 7.6 Kindly refer CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj). (DPB 52-55) held that: ITA No. 10-JP-2021 Rameshwar Prasad Shringi vs. Pr. CIT, Udaipur “Once Assessing Officer has made enquiries during the course of assessment proceedings on the relevant issues and the assessee has given detailed explanation by a letter in writing and the Assessing Offer allowed the claim being satisfied with the exp…

ANNU AGROTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. PR.CIT, UDIAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 9/JPR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 09/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Cuke Annu Agrotech Private Limited, Pr.Cit, S-47/48, S-47/48, Vs. Udaipur. Commercial Shops, Ipia 324005, Rajasthan, India. Pan No.: Aagca 5903 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Mahendra Gargieya(Adv.) & Shri Devang Gargieya (Itp) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 27/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15 /09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Gargieya(Adv.) &For Respondent: Shri B.K. Gupta (Pr.CIT-DR)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 263Section 56(2)(vii)Section 56(2)(viib)Section 68

…to Commissioner to revise each and every order, if in his (subjective) opinion, same has been passed without making enquiries or verification which should have been made. 11. Supporting Case Laws on S. 263: 11.1 CIT v/s Rajasthan Financial Corporation (1996) 134 CTR 145 (Raj). (DPB 51-54) 11.2 CIT v/s Ganpat Ram Bishnoi (2005) 198 CTR (Raj) 546 (DPB 55-58) 11.3 Gabriel India Ltd. [1993] 203 ITR 108 (Bom), 25 ITA 09/JP/2021_ Annu Agrotech P Ltd. Vs Pr.CIT 11.4 Elder IT Solutions (P.) Ltd. vs CIT [2015] 59 taxmann.com 232 (Mumbai - Trib.) 11.5 Rajmal Kanwar v. CIT-I [2017] 82 taxmann.com 119 (Jaipur - Trib.) 1…