Seth Brothers v. CIT

PRAMILA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(5), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…some other official, therefore, the\naction of the ld. AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent\napplication of mind deserves to be held bad in law.\n\nFurther the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported\nin 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re-opening of the\nassessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW 57,79)\n\n\"11\n(a) There must be material for belief\n(b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an\nopinion.\n(c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip,…

SH. KAPIL TANEJA,JAIPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…d, therefore, the action of the Respondent falls foul of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Chhugamal Rajpal which is clearly applicable to the facts of these appeals. Further Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW 57,79) "11 (a) There must be material for belief • Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an opinion. • Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip, rumour or conju…

MUKESH JAIN HUF,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…es or profits\nWhether, on facts, impugned\nreopening notice and further reassessment order passed were to be quashed\nHeld, yes [Paras 6 and 9] [In favour of assessee]\n\nFurther the Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT\nreported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re-opening of\nthe assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW\n57,79)\n\n“11 (a) There must be material for belief\n(b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at\nan opinion.\n(c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip,\n…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

…herefore, the action of\nthe Respondent falls foul of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in\nChhugamalRajpal which is clearly applicable to the facts of these appeals.\n\nFurther Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT\nreported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for re-opening of the\nassessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW 57,79)\n\n\"11 (a) There must be material for belief\n• Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at\nanopinion.\n• Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip,\nrumour or…

KALINDEE ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

…received from some other official, therefore, the action of the Id. AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent application of mind deserves to be held bad in law. The Hon'ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW 57,79) “11(a) There must be material for belief (b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an opinion. (c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip, rumour or…

PADMAVATI AGRICO (INDIA) PVT LTD,AJMER vs. ACIT CIRCLE - 1, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…received from some other official, therefore, the action of the ld. AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent application of mind deserves to be held bad in law. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW 57,79) “11(a) There must be material for belief (b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an opinion. (c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip, rumour or…

ITO WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR vs. M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY G-1/35 TO 37, 47, 48 EPIP, JEWELLERY ZONE, SITAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

…received from some other official, therefore, the action of the ld. AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent application of mind deserves to be held bad in law. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW 57,79). “11 (a) There must be material for belief M/s Silvex & Co. (India) Ltd. (b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an opinion. (c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based…

M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY INDIA LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-7(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

…received from some other official, therefore, the action of the ld. AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent application of mind deserves to be held bad in law. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re-opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (Reproduced in 28 TW 57,79). “11 (a) There must be material for belief M/s Silvex & Co. (India) Ltd. (b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an opinion. (c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based…

NIRMALA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…received from some other official, therefore, the action of the ld. AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent application of mind deserves to be held bad in law. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re- opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (APB 1-10) (a) There must be material for belief "11 (b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an opinion. (c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip, rumour or conjuncture.…

NIRMALA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

…received from some other official, therefore, the action of the ld. AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent application of mind deserves to be held bad in law. The Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers Vs. CIT reported in 169 CTR 519 has laid down following principles for the re- opening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961: (APB 1-10) (a) There must be material for belief "11 (b) Circumstances must exist and cannot be deemed to exist for arriving at an opinion. (c) Reason to believe must be honest and not based on suspicion, gossip, rumour or conjuncture.…

DWARKA GEMS LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…fore, the action of the AO in reopening the completed assessment without independent application of mind is not valid and bad in law. The ld. A/R of the assessee has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Seth Brothers vs. CIT, 169 CTR 519 (Guj.) and submitted that there was no material with the AO for having the reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment. The ld. A/R has further contended that the 5 M/s. Dwarka Gems Ltd., Jaipur. reopening is after the expiry of four years from the end of the assessment year and, therefore, the AO cannot invoke t…