Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC

SHEETAL BATHLA,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2) KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

…. During the year 2012- 13 assessee received some loan and transaction with her known firms and person. She also took loan against FDRs and repaid. However, assessee has not deposited cash in bank during A.Y 2012-13 3.4 In the case of MukeshModi&Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion of tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer in form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded payment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression "reason to believe" exposing Assessee for re…

VIJIT SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…on to induce the belief. The Court can always examine this aspect\nthough the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be\ninvestigated by the Court (SheoNath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC).\nIn the case of MukeshModi&Ors.vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that\nEvasion of tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the\nexchequer in form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that\nit had evaded payment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on\nmere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression \"reason to\nbelieve\" exposing Assessee…

MAYA KUMARI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…n to induce the\nbelief. The Court can always examine this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of\nthe reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the Court (SheoNath Singh v. AAC,\n(1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC).\nIn the case of MukeshModi&Ors.vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion of tax\nwas menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer in form of tax could\nnot be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded payment of tax. Rowing and\nfishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy\nexpression \"reason to believe\" exposing Assessee…

MO. SHARIPH KURESHI,SIKAR vs. ITO WARD-4 SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

…y the provision of law. The Court can always examine this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the Court (SheoNath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC). In the case of Mukesh Modi &Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion of tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer in form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded payment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression "reason to believe" exposing Assessee for re…

RAMA SHANKER PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

…he\nprovision of law. The Court can always examine this aspect though the\ndeclaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by\nthe Court (SheoNath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC).\nIn the case of Mukesh Modi &Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that\nEvasion of tax was menace to society but Assesseecontributing to the exchequer\nin form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded\npayment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or\nchange of opinion could not satisfy expression \"reason to believe\" exposing\nAssessee…

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

…ninduce the belief. The Court can always examine this aspect though the\ndeclaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by\nthe Court (Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC).\nIn the case of Mukesh Modi & Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion\nof tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer\nin form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded\npayment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or\nchange of opinion could not satisfy expression \"reason to believe\" exposing\nAssessee…

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

…ninduce the belief. The Court can always examine this aspect though the\ndeclaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by\nthe Court (Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC).\nIn the case of Mukesh Modi & Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion\nof tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer\nin form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded\npayment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or\nchange of opinion could not satisfy expression \"reason to believe\" exposing\nAssessee…

SHALINI JAGWAYAN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

…escaped any actual income. He has proceeded only on imagination or suspicion rather\nthan to reason to believe. He has only information borrowed, hence no notice u/s 147 can\nbe issued on the borrowed information.\n\nIn the case of Mukesh Modi & Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that\nEvasion of tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer in form\nof tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded payment of tax.\nRowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could\nnot satisfy expression \"reason to believe\" exposing Assessee…

PRADEEP KUMAR,JHUJHUNU vs. ITO WARD -2, JHUJHUNU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

…lways examine this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be 15 Shri Pradeep Kumar, Jhunjhunu. investigated by the Court (Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC). In the case of Mukesh Modi & Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion of tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer in form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded payment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression "reason to believe" exposing Assessee for re…

SHRI SATYA NARAYAN BAIRWA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 867 & 869/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Years :2008-09 & 2009-10 Cuke Shri Satya Narayan Bairwa, I.T.O., Vs. 97/77, Shipra Path, Ward-2(4), Mansarovar, Jaipur (Raj). Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Ahppb 0077 J Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

…to induce the belief. The Court can always examine this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the Court (Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC). In the case of Mukesh Modi &Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion of tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer in form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded payment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression "reason to believe" exposing Assessee for re…

SHRI SATYA NARAYAN BAIRWA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 867 & 869/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Years :2008-09 & 2009-10 Cuke Shri Satya Narayan Bairwa, I.T.O., Vs. 97/77, Shipra Path, Ward-2(4), Mansarovar, Jaipur (Raj). Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Ahppb 0077 J Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 20/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/09/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

…to induce the belief. The Court can always examine this aspect though the declaration or sufficiency of the reasons for the belief cannot be investigated by the Court (Sheo Nath Singh v. AAC, (1971) 82 ITR 147 (SC). In the case of Mukesh Modi &Ors. vs. DCIT 366 ITR 418 (Raj) held that Evasion of tax was menace to society but Assessee contributing to the exchequer in form of tax could not be allowed to suffer on mere pretence that it had evaded payment of tax. Rowing and fishing enquiry in hands of AO on mere suspicion or change of opinion could not satisfy expression "reason to believe" exposing Assessee for re…

ATAL BIHARI GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

…in order to conduct an enquiry and find out whether the assessee has derived or earned any income which has escaped assessment. In support of his contention he has relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of Mukesh Modi vs. DCIT, 366 ITR 418 (Raj.) as well as decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of CIT vs. M/s. Sahil Knit Fab, 249 CTR 454 5 Shri Atal Bihari Gupta, Jaipur. (P&H) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that reopening of the assessment is permissible to bring to tax escaped income and not to make investigation or verification. Thus the…