IMRAN MAJEED,SRINAGAR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRINAGAR, SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal for the Asstt

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reassessment in case of assessee was initiated after expiry of three years from end of relevant assessment year, sanction for issue of notice under section 148 ought to have been granted by authorities of rank referred to in section 151 (ii) and not by authorities of relatively lower rank under section 151 (i) Whether there was a gross delay

KHURSHID AHMAD DAR,JAMMU AND KASHMIR, INDIA vs. ITO WARD, UDHAMPUR, UDHAMPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lalmeena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Blekhurshid Ahmad Dar Vs. Ito, Ward, Nully Poshwari Turkawangam, Udhampur Shopia, 192305, Jammu & Kashmir, India.Pin 192305. Pan No. Awmpd5664K Assessee By Shri Rohit Kapoor, Adv. & Shri V.S. Aggarwal, Itp. Revenue By Mrs. Roshanta Kumari Meena, Cit Dr. Date Of Hearing 23.09.2025. Date Of Pronouncement To. [1 .2025. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.:

section 148A. 5. We have heard both the sides and perused the material on record. We find that the notice u/s 148 dated 28.03.2021, was issued on 13.04.2021, as contended by the Ld. AR without adhering to new procedure applicable from 01.04.2021 in complying with the provisions of sec 148A, as no notice u/s 148A(b) and order u/s 148A

SMT..ANURADHA,PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(1), PATHANKOT

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

reassessment notice, has to apply his mind and form an opinion. The mere appending of the expression 'approved' says nothing. It is not as if the CIT (A) has to record elaborate reasons for agreeing with the noting put up. At the same time, satisfaction has to be recorded of the given case which can be reflected in the briefest

RAJESH KARYANA STORE,MUNICIPAL BAZAR vs. ITO, WARD 1, PATHANKOT, PATHANKOT

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

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

reassessment proceedings initiated by the Assessing Officer are bad in law and liable to be quashed, as the notice issued under section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 31.03.2021 is unsigned and therefore invalid. 2) That CIT(A) failed to appreciate that, the notice issued under section 148A

PIRTPAL SINGH BRAR,MUKTSAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), MUKTSAR, MUKTSAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

section 249 of the Act.” 8. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds contained in the memorandum of appeal. Referring to the paper book filed along with an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of ITAT Rules, 1963, the ld. AR submitted that agricultural income on sale of agricultural produce has been

HARVINDER SINGH BULLAR,VPO RANJITGARH, MUKTSAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), MUKTSAR, MUKTSAR

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

148A and also the issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act are void ab-initio and invalid and as a result thereof, the consequential assessment as framed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w. section 144 of the Act, dated 09.03.2023 deserves to be quashed as the above said proceedings have been initiated by the JAO, instead of Faceless

SAINIK CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LTD,JAMMU AND KASHMIR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAMMU, JAMMU AND KASHMIR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reassessment proceedings were initiated as per procedure vide issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2022, calling for return of income, and in absence of any response from the assessee in course of assessment proceedings, the assessment has been completed on a total income of. Rs.1.08 crores. 5. The matter was carried in appeal and the ld. first

SAINIK COOPERATIVE HOUSE BUILDING SOCIETY LIMITED,SAINIK COLONY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - WARD-1, JAMMU

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

reassessment proceedings were initiated as per procedure vide issue of notice u/s 148 of the Act dated 29.03.2022, calling for return of income, and in absence of any response from the assessee in course of assessment proceedings, the assessment has been completed on a total income of. Rs.1.08 crores. 5. The matter was carried in appeal and the ld. first

LAKHVIR SINGH 810, VPO MALLAH TEHSIL JAGRAON DISTRICT LUDHIANA,PUNJAB vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT NFAC DELHI JAO INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MOGA, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

148A(d) and notice u/s 148 issued on the same date. Thereafter various notices were issued u/s 142(1) calling for details and particulars on various dates of hearing and the final show cause notice was issued on 22.12.2023. 6. In response to the last SCN, the assessee submitted copies of bank statement, cash book, Form 26-AS and copies