SHRI ABDUL HANNAN,TINSUKIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, TINSUKIA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees( ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.46 /Gau/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

13. Taking note of the aforesaid dictum of law laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, let us examine whether the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) dated 30.12.2016 is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Since in the present case, the ld PCIT has exercised jurisdiction u/s.263

SHRI ABDUL HAMID,TINSUKIA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, TINSUKIA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessees( ITA No

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.46 /Gau/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2014-15)

13. Taking note of the aforesaid dictum of law laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court, let us examine whether the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) dated 30.12.2016 is erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Since in the present case, the ld PCIT has exercised jurisdiction u/s.263

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

68,800/- which was erroneously offered as Income by the appellant company and was thoroughly unjustified in disallowing the claim raised before her. 4. For that the appellant urges leave to raise any further/ additional ground at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company had e-filed the return

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

e. Therefore subsequent to the search action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on any assessee, section 153 A comes into play leading to :- (i) Automatic issuance of notices under section 153A for six assessment years prior to the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted and (ii) if the Assessing

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

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

e. Therefore subsequent to the search action u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on any assessee, section 153 A comes into play leading to :- (i) Automatic issuance of notices under section 153A for six assessment years prior to the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which search was conducted and (ii) if the Assessing

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).

e. completed assessments as on the date of search would hold their base and would not abate. Thus, what emerges is that only pending Assessments as on the date of search shall abate. The legislature is clear that any appeal, revision or rectification proceedings, if pending as on the date of search shall abate. On the contrary

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3), GUWAHATI vs. PRAG RAJ SINGLA, GUWAHATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.160/Gau/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2013-14)

E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: The captioned appeal filed by the Revenue, pertaining to assessment year 2013-14, is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-2, Guwahati, which in turn arises out of an assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self

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

68 1 BAJRANG LAL 2012-13 Twenty First Century 4,76,18,448 PB-1 BAMALWA India Ltd. 2 BAJRANG LAL 2013-14 Twenty First Century 3,79,39,430 PB-2 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Clubbed income of Minor Son RohitBamalwa) 3 BACHH RAJ 2012-13 Twenty First Century 9,52,37,280 PB-3 BAMALWA India Ltd. (Self