SHRI TARLOCHAN SINGH,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MANSA

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

73,310/- + Agriculture income at Rs. 11,56,169/- vide order u/s 143(3)1147 dated 20.12.2017. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts & law in confirming the validity of the proceedings u/s 1471148 because the Joint Commissioner of Income Tax did not record the satisfaction on the reasons recorded by the AO, as prescribed u/s 151, that

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRITSAR. vs. SH. JAIMAL SINGH, L/H. SH. PREM CHAND,, TARN TARAN

In the result, the appeal bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

reassessment u/s 147 on the ground of AIR Information not being reflected in the return of Income, ignoring the clear position of the law that section 139(9) can only be used to rectify defects, if any in the return of income. 7. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and facts and circumstances of the case

SHRIMATI NEETIMA GOYAL,FEROZPUR CANTT. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,3(2), FEROZPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed on legal ground

Bench: Shri L.P. Sahu, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.184/Asr/2018 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Neetima Goyal, Vs. Ito, Ward-3(2), Ferozepur Prop. Raghav Sales, G.T.Road, Ferozepur Cantt., Pin-152001 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Panno. : Aicpg 3586 H (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri I.P.Bansal, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Dr

section 147 and also on the ground that the sanction granted by the JCIT is not in accordance of mandate of law. For this purpose, reliance is placed on the decision in the case of Smt. Prabha Rani Agarwal V. ITO. Copy at pages 1-7 of compendium. 5 6. From the reasons recorded it can be seen that just

AMBEY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,BATHINDA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. N. S. Saini & Sh. N. K. Choudhryita No. 121/Asr./2017 : Asstt. Year : 2011-12 Ambey Construction Company, Vs Asstt. Commissioner Of #21605, Street No. 7, Power House Income Tax, Circle-1, Road, Bathinda Bathinda (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aanfa7199K

73,54,700/- as against the income declared in the return at Rs.1,66,42,143/-. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in confirming the validity of proceedings initiated u/s 147/148 by the Ld. AO despite the established fact that notice u/s 148 of the Act was not served in accordance with the provisions of section

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

147 is bad in law as the jurisdictional notice issued u/s 148 and proceedings completed u/s 148A(d) were made by the jurisdictional AO which is in violation with the provisions of section 151A read with notification no S.O. 1466 (E) No 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022. 6. That the information uploaded on the insight portal is nowhere corroborated with any independent

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

147 is bad in law as the jurisdictional notice issued u/s 148 and proceedings completed u/s 148A(d) were made by the jurisdictional AO which is in violation with the provisions of section 151A read with notification no S.O. 1466 (E) No 18/2022 dated 29.03.2022. 6. That the information uploaded on the insight portal is nowhere corroborated with any independent

SH. MANGAT TREHAN ,HOSHIARPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, HOSHIARPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 223/Asr/2019 is 10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

147 read with section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by reasons of the failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary' for his assessment for the assessment year 2007-08. Therefore, notice u/s 148 is issued to bring to tax the income of Rs.27,28,351/- and any other income

MEASAGE BHAI INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MOGA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73,90,374/- during the F.Y 2010-11 instead of Rs. 58,74,080/-. During the course of proceedings u/s 131(1A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Sh. Rajesh Mittal, Prop M/s Kamna Overseas had admitted in his statement (Q. No: 14 of his statement) that he had not entered into any sale/purchase from M/s Bhai Industries

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

M/S NARULA FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

MEASAGE NARULA SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,MOGA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR vs. M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVTE LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

MEASAGE SAT KARTAR SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED,FEROZEPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure

M/S NARULA OIL & FATS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHEMDABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue are dismissed and appeals of assessee are allowed in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

73. The appeals are accordingly dismissed but, in the circumstances, no orders as to costs.” 7.2.1.2. The SLP of revenue against the order of MeetaGutgutia is dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of PCIT, Central IT, New Delhiv.MeetaGutgutia [2018] 96 taxmann.com 468 (SC) “Section 153A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure