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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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

1) which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section which could show whether any notice under section 143(2) was issued for was issued for selecting them for scrutiny selecting them for scrutiny assessments or not. Such details have been put by the assessments or not. Such details have

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).

6 years preceding the search but not for the year of search or requisition and thus no return is required to be filed for the year of search us. 153A of the Act Only regular return u/s 139 to be filed First proviso is reiteration of the provision containing clause (b) of section 153A (1) of the Act that

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

6 DTR (SC) 308. In this case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court while rejecting the SLP filed by the Department challenging a Delhi High Court order in the matter of Section 68, has clearly expounded the following: "Can the amount of share money be regarded as undisclosed income under s. 68 of IT Act, 1961? We find no merit

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI vs. M/S. WINNER DEALTRADE (P) LTD.,, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing appeal of the assessee without appreciating the facts of the case. (2) On facts and circumstances of the case and as well as in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.18