← All Phrases

“complete scrutiny”

Assessment ProceduresSection 143(3)Section 143(3)2,579 judgments

The decision most relied on for complete scrutiny is Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair v. CIT (237 ITR 70), cited in 42 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on complete scrutiny

Dr. C. Balakrishnan Nair v. CIT
237 ITR 70 · 1999 · High Court
42
citing judgments

A restraint order under Section 132(3) cannot be passed solely on the ground that scrutiny of documents or assets could not be completed during a search, as the search process must be continuous. Additionally, Section 158BC (Chapter XIV-B) cannot be invoked if there is no violation of the Income-tax Act, such as when valid exemptions are claimed.

Amal Kumar Ghosh v. Asstt. CIT
361 ITR 458 · 2014 · High Court
39
citing judgments

The selection of cases for scrutiny must be completed within the time prescribed by CBDT instructions. The department is bound by its own standards and cannot act with discrimination or selectively apply them.

70 ITD 214 11. Jain Bharat Tanners Vs. CIT (Mad) 264 ITR 673 12. Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. CIT(Mad)
101 ITD 495 · 2006 · ITAT
35
citing judgments

An assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue if the Assessing Officer fails to conduct necessary inquiries or investigate facts when circumstances warrant it, demonstrating a lack of complete scrutiny. This failure to act as an investigator and not just an adjudicator can trigger revision under Section 263.

ITO v. V.R. Global Energy (P.) Ltd.
113 Taxmann.com 31 · 2020 · Supreme Court
21
citing judgments

Share capital and share premium cannot be treated as unexplained cash credits under section 68 of the Income Tax Act, especially when cash did not pass at any stage and entries made a complete round. The Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against this view.

CIT v. Smt. Padmavathi
120 Taxmann.com 187 · 2020 · High Court
20
citing judgments

An assessment order cannot be held erroneous and prejudicial to revenue if the Assessing Officer (AO) could not have travelled beyond the issues forming the subject matter of 'limited scrutiny'. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT) cannot invoke Section 263 to set aside an assessment on grounds not forming part of the limited scrutiny.

2004) 267 ITR 698 (Raj) 5. Paul Mathews & Sons v CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker) 6. CIT v. Arvind Jewellers
253 ITR 124 · 2002 · High Court
13
citing judgments

A revisionary order under Section 263 is invalid if it is based on the same facts and involves extensive enquiry after the assessment proceedings were completed, implying a lack of application of mind during the original assessment.

Bakshi Vikram Vikas Construction Co. P. Ltd. v. DCIT
131 CTR 203 · 1996 · High Court
11
citing judgments

The Project Completion Method (PCM) for accounting is a recognized and scientifically sound method that has judicial approval for real estate businesses, allowing profit or loss to be recognized only upon project completion.

CIT (2003) 263 ITR 101 (Ker) 6. CIT v Arvind Jewellers (2003) 259 ITR 502 (Guj) 7. CIT v. Hastings Properties
247 ITR 555 · 2001 · High Court
11
citing judgments

A Principal Commissioner (PCIT) cannot assume jurisdiction under Section 263 merely because the Assessing Officer's (AO) view is not acceptable, if the AO has made due enquiries and taken a plausible view.

Judgments citing complete scrutiny

Shri Rahul Gupta, Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 191/RPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.190/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta (Huf) M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aamhr5784E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.191/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aexpg9423L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.192/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Radhika Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aqfpm4577M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.193/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pawan Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg7808B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr

For Respondent: Shri R.B Doshi, CA
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

return of income for A.Y.2015-16 on 18.08.2015, declaring an income of Rs.17,96,730/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for “complete scrutiny” under CASS for examination of “suspicious sale transaction in shares (Penny Stock tab in ITS), and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued ... drive home their contentions. 9. At the very outset, it may be pointed out that the case of the assessee was selected for “complete scrutiny” under CASS for examination of “suspicious sale transactions in shares (Penny Stock tab in ITS). Before proceeding any further, I may herein observe, that though

Rahul Gupta(HUF), Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 190/RPR/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur12 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.190/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta (Huf) M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aamhr5784E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.191/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Rahul Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aexpg9423L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.192/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Radhika Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aqfpm4577M .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.193/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Pawan Gupta M-20, Sector-1, Avanti Vihar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Adcpg7808B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-3(1), Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent : Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By : Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. Dr

For Respondent: Shri R.B Doshi, CA
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

return of income for A.Y.2015-16 on 18.08.2015, declaring an income of Rs.17,96,730/-. Subsequently, the case of the assessee was selected for “complete scrutiny” under CASS for examination of “suspicious sale transaction in shares (Penny Stock tab in ITS), and notice u/s.143(2) of the Act was issued ... drive home their contentions. 9. At the very outset, it may be pointed out that the case of the assessee was selected for “complete scrutiny” under CASS for examination of “suspicious sale transactions in shares (Penny Stock tab in ITS). Before proceeding any further, I may herein observe, that though

Dhruv Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Kota vs. CIT(A), Udaipur-2, Udaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 86/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Ao Who Ignored The Same.

For Appellant: Shri B.A. Maheshwari, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl.CIT
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

beyond the reasons for scrutiny selection and such cases are called Limited Scrutiny cases and only the remaining returns are taken up for complete scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act. 13.2 Meaning thereby, that exercise of power under sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act leading

Sh. Swapnil Agarwal, 1, Agarwal Dharam Kanta, Adarsh Nagar, Ajmer vs. ITO(TDS), Ajmer

ITA 160/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Chaudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 271CSection 274

return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act, 1961 on 11.04.2015. This case was selected for scrutiny through CASS for ‘Complete Scrutiny’. Accordingly, a notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 28.08.2015 and case fixed for hearing on 08.09.2015. This notice

Bhanu Parkash Bansal, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward2(3), Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 133/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 May 2023AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: None (E written submission)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 5

beyond the reasons for scrutiny selection and such cases are called Limited Scrutiny cases and only the remaining returns are taken up for complete scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act. 13.2 Meaning thereby, that exercise of power under sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act leading

New Delhi Export House, New Delhi vs. JCIT Special Range-18, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1574/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmanew Delhi Export House Vs. Jcit 26-A, Hanuman Lane, Special Range-18, Connaught Place, New Delhi New Delhi-110 001 Pan No. Aacfn 5373 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S. Sadhu, C.A. Shri Jatin Proothi, C.A. Revenue By Shri S. L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 01.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 08.05.2023

Section 143(3)

unwarranted and not capable of being sustained. 3. That the Ld. AO has erred in converting the assessment proceedings from Limited Scrutiny to Complete Scrutiny without following the binding directions/instructions of the CBDT issued vide Instruction number 05/2016 dated 14.07.2016 and 20/2015 dated 29.12.2015. 3.1 Validity of assessment

Hasini Infra Constructions and Developers, Kakinada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 9/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

erred in restricting the addition made to 8% of only the unaccounted turnover as this case 17 was taken up for complete scrutiny being the assessment year relevant to the year of search U/s. 132 and the books of account were rejected as the assessee could not produce the updated

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry vs. Hasini Infra Consrtuctions& Developers, Kakinada

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 25/VIZ/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

erred in restricting the addition made to 8% of only the unaccounted turnover as this case 17 was taken up for complete scrutiny being the assessment year relevant to the year of search U/s. 132 and the books of account were rejected as the assessee could not produce the updated

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry vs. Hasini Infra Consrtuctions& Developers, Kakinada

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 24/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

erred in restricting the addition made to 8% of only the unaccounted turnover as this case 17 was taken up for complete scrutiny being the assessment year relevant to the year of search U/s. 132 and the books of account were rejected as the assessee could not produce the updated

Hasini Infra Constructions and Developers, Kakinada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 11/VIZ/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

erred in restricting the addition made to 8% of only the unaccounted turnover as this case 17 was taken up for complete scrutiny being the assessment year relevant to the year of search U/s. 132 and the books of account were rejected as the assessee could not produce the updated

Hasini Infra Constructions and Developers, Kakinada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 10/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

erred in restricting the addition made to 8% of only the unaccounted turnover as this case 17 was taken up for complete scrutiny being the assessment year relevant to the year of search U/s. 132 and the books of account were rejected as the assessee could not produce the updated

The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Vijayawada vs. Rama Krishna Housing Private Limited, Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 123/VIZ/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40A(2)(b)

Further, the survey operation U/s. 133A was conducted on the assessee on 30/03/2015 by ADIT (Inv), Vijayawada and thereafter the case was converted into complete scrutiny. During the course of survey it was found that there is a difference between the value of closing stock as shown in the books

M/S Ready Roti India Pvt. Ltd., F-28, Riico Industrial Area, Sare Khurd, Alwar vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 94/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. RuniPal, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

beyond the reasons for scrutiny selection and such cases are called Limited Scrutiny cases and only the remaining returns are taken up for complete scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act. 13.2 Meaning thereby, that exercise of power under sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act leading

Ravi Agarwal, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 7, Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 72/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Itr. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Law & On Facts Of Confirming The Addition Of Rs.22,995/- Being Double Addition Of Speculative Income.’’

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bhargava, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl.CIT
Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36(1)(va)

CIRLCE-7, JAIPUR reasons for scrutiny selection and such cases are called Limited Scrutiny cases and only the remaining returns are taken up for complete scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act. 13.2 Meaning thereby, that exercise of power under sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act leading

Rajasthan Hindi Granth Academy, Jaipur vs. ITO(Exemption), Ward 2

ITA 60/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 10Section 127Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

which was duly served upon the assessee on 14/09/2015 through registered post. Subsequently, this case has been received on transfer to this ward to complete scrutiny assessment in compliance to order u/s 127 of the I.T. Act, passed by CIT (Exemption), Jaipur dated 01/07/2016. Notice

A September Home Lifestyle Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Jaipur

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 40/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Due Date Of Deposit As Mentioned In Relevant Act Despite The Fact That The Amount Was Deposited In The Relevant Fund Before Due Date Of Filing Of Income Tax Return Under Income Tax Act, 1961.’’

For Appellant: Shri Mudit Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Chanchal Meena, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

beyond the reasons for scrutiny selection and such cases are called Limited Scrutiny cases and only the remaining returns are taken up for complete scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act. 13.2 Meaning thereby, that exercise of power under sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act leading

Smt. Sushila Devi, Sh 8A, Village Daulatpura, Post Katrathal, Sikar vs. ACIT, Circle, Sikar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 149/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 149/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 Sushila Devi SH 8A, Village Daulapura Post Katrathal, Sikar cuke Vs. ACIT, Circle, Sikar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AGVPD 6837 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of H

For Appellant: Shri P. C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 271BSection 44A

declaring an income of Rs. 22,11,260/-. She deals in retail sale of Petrol & Diesel. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS and assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at an assessed income

Dy Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai vs. Nela Trust, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2966/MUM/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bledcit (Exemption) – 2(1) V. Neia Trust Room No. 608, 6Th Floor C/O. Ecgc Of India Mtnl Building, Cumballa Hill 10Th Floor, Express Tower Mumbai - 400026 Nariman Point Mumbai – 400021 Pan: Aaatn9999F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 2(15)

risk cover for projects and other high-value exports. The Assessee Trust is registered u/s 12A of the Act. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS to verify the issues such as "Receipts of Trust, High Refund Claim and Ratio of establishment and administrative expenses to expenditure

Swastic Oil Industries, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 35/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

beyond the reasons for scrutiny selection and such cases are called Limited Scrutiny cases and only the remaining returns are taken up for complete scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act. 13.2 Meaning thereby, that exercise of power under sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act leading

Swastic Oil Industires, Jaipur vs. ACIT Circle -7, Jaipur

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 34/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur02 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 34 & 35/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20 M/s. Swastic Oil Industries F-5-F8, Industrial Area Newai, Tonk 304 021 cuke Vs. The ACIT Circle-7 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJFS 8180 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT lquokbZ

For Appellant: Shri Devang Gargieya, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)Section 43B

beyond the reasons for scrutiny selection and such cases are called Limited Scrutiny cases and only the remaining returns are taken up for complete scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the Act. 13.2 Meaning thereby, that exercise of power under sub-section (2) of section 143 of the Act leading