ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

148 of the Income Tax Act and again a reassessment order was passed on 18.12.2017 under section 143(3) read with section 147. Therefore, proviso to this section would puts an embargo upon the powers of the ld. Assessing Officer to issue a notice upon the assessee unless he demonstrated that on account of failure on the part

AMIT KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, INCOME TAX OFFICER

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 148 seeking to reopen assessment - Whether on facts, Assessing Officer had prima facie reason to believe that income chargeable to tax escaped assessment and, thus, validity of impugned reassessment proceedings was to be upheld - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]” In the case of Reena Jain reported in 174 taxmann.com 849 (Calcutta). The head notes read

AMIT KUMAR,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), GUWAHATI, INCOME TAS OFFICER

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

section 148 seeking to reopen assessment - Whether on facts, Assessing Officer had prima facie reason to believe that income chargeable to tax escaped assessment and, thus, validity of impugned reassessment proceedings was to be upheld - Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of revenue]” In the case of Reena Jain reported in 174 taxmann.com 849 (Calcutta). The head notes read

RISHI AGARWAL,GUWAHATI vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

bogus purchase may be added to the total income. If such was the factual position in the case on hand then it is incumbent upon the Assessing Officer to inquire into the matter and take the proceedings to the logical end. Having not done so, the PCIT was fully justified in exercising jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. Thus

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. BHAGWATI DEVII BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. VISHAL BAMALWA , DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BACHH RAJ BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. HANS RAJ BAMALWA (HUF), DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. USHA BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE- 1, DIBRUGARH vs. MEENAKSHI BAMALWA SONI, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. RAVI BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. BAJRANG LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINAY BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. MADAN LAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. SHEETAL BAMALWA, DIBRUGARH

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and that of the Cross Objections of the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

148, 149 and 151 and in section 153, in case of a person where search is initiated under section 132. The initiation of the search is to be construed as if actual search was conducted. Even availability of the name of an assessee in authorisation of the warrant is there that would not be suffice to say that search