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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. PRAMOD KUMAR 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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

D.C.I.T., CIRCLE-1, DIBRUGARH vs. VINOD 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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

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

section 153A has also compiled in table, which reads as under:- S.N PARTICULARS AY NAME OF THE SCRIP QUANTUM OF PAPER O IN WHICH LTCG EXEMPTION BOOK CLAIMED CLAIMED U/S REFER 10(38) – ENCE ADDITION U/S 68 1

M/S. BALAJI ENTERPRISE,GUWAHATI vs. ADDL. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-3, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm]

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 should be deleted or set aside?" 4. The High Court, disagreeing with the Tribunal, held, that the provisions of Section 142 and sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 143 will have mandatory application in a case where the assessing officer in repudiation of return filed in response

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CIRCLE-AGARTALA, AGARTALA vs. SHRI SATYAJIT SAHA, AGARTALA

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

1. This is a batch of two appeals pertaining to the same assessee. ITA No. 190/Gty/2019 is the main appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to AY 2014-15; the CO No. 07/Gty/2019 has been filed by the assessee mainly in support of the findings given by the Ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order. 2. Both these appeals arise

AMPLEX PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGARTALA vs. DCIT/ACIT, CIRCLE SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A).

10 M/s Amplex Projects Private Limited In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: (i) in case of search under section 132 or requisition under section 1324, the Assessing Officer assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 1534. (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in cate

ACCRECENT WAY MARKETING (P) LTD.,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, GUWAHATI

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 68 in this case is highly irregular and against the provisions of law. The Assessment Order may therefore be struck down as illegal. Ground 3: For that the Learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances of the claim for deduction raised before her in regard to liability of 5,11,68,800/- which