ASHA CHOUDHURY,IMPHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 IMPHAL, IMPHAL

Bench: the date of hearing.”

reassessment action initiated under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ["Act"] for Assessment Year ["AY"] 2015-2016. The petitioner has impugned the order referable to Section 148A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. SHRI SANWARMALL AGARWALLA, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

148A of the Act without satisfying the condition precedent as prescribed in clause (b) of section 149 of the Act as well as the Ld. PCIT/CIT should not have given the sanction to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act on the reasons recorded by AO as a fit case, without satisfying the legal requirement of section

INCOME TAX OFFICERM WARD-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. SHRI BHAMA AGARWALLA, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

148A of the Act without satisfying the condition precedent as prescribed in clause (b) of section 149 of the Act as well as the Ld. PCIT/CIT should not have given the sanction to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act on the reasons recorded by AO as a fit case, without satisfying the legal requirement of section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. SHRI ANKIT AGARWALLA, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

148A of the Act without satisfying the condition precedent as prescribed in clause (b) of section 149 of the Act as well as the Ld. PCIT/CIT should not have given the sanction to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act on the reasons recorded by AO as a fit case, without satisfying the legal requirement of section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR vs. M/S. PARSURAM SANWARMAL AGARWALLA & SONS, DIMAPUR

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

148A of the Act without satisfying the condition precedent as prescribed in clause (b) of section 149 of the Act as well as the Ld. PCIT/CIT should not have given the sanction to issue notice u/s. 148 of the Act on the reasons recorded by AO as a fit case, without satisfying the legal requirement of section

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding. 2. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 19,93,72,482/- u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal. ITA No. 222/GTY/2024: 1. For that under the facts & circumstances

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding. 2. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 19,93,72,482/- u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal. ITA No. 222/GTY/2024: 1. For that under the facts & circumstances

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding. 2. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 19,93,72,482/- u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal. ITA No. 222/GTY/2024: 1. For that under the facts & circumstances

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding. 2. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 19,93,72,482/- u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal. ITA No. 222/GTY/2024: 1. For that under the facts & circumstances

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding. 2. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 19,93,72,482/- u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal. ITA No. 222/GTY/2024: 1. For that under the facts & circumstances

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding. 2. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 19,93,72,482/- u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal. ITA No. 222/GTY/2024: 1. For that under the facts & circumstances

JAYANTA KHAUND,GUWAHATI vs. ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

reassessment proceeding. 2. For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 19,93,72,482/- u/s 68 of I.T. Act. 3. The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal. ITA No. 222/GTY/2024: 1. For that under the facts & circumstances

MANOJ ANAND,GUWAHATI vs. ITO W-2(2) GHY, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm Manoj Anand Ito W-2(2), Ghy Flat 4D, Garima Grand, Aaykar Bhawan, Christian Basti, Departmental Representative B. G.S. Road, Guwahati-781005, Vs. Baruah Road, Guwahati-781007, Assam Assam (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agbpa9883C

148A(d) of the Act, no material / evidences as relied on by the ld. AO were provided to the assessee. Therefore, the same could not be used against the assessee to make the additions. In defense of his argument the ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kale Khan Mohammad hanif