JAYA JUNEJA,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

148A of the Act. In response to the notice under section 148, the assessee filed a return of income on 26.04.2022 declaring the same income and capital loss as declared in the original return. During the reassessment

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. PRATAAP SNACKS LIMITED, INDORE

In the result revenue’s appeal is dismissed and assessee’s cross-objection is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment, and such issue comes to his notice subsequently in the course of the proceedings under this section, irrespective of the fact that the provisions of section 148A

SANTOSH RATHORE,INDORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE - 1, INDORE

Appeal is allowed

reassessment\nproceeding on the ground that there has been no proper approval u/s.151 of\nthe Act. As per section 151 of the Act which deals with sanction for issue of\nnotice and sub-section (1) says that no notice shall be issued u/s.148 of the\nAct by an AO after the expiry of a period of four years from

AJIT BONDRIYA,LIMASSOL, CYPRUS vs. ITO 2(5), BHOPAL, BHOPAL, MADHYA PRADESH

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

148A(d) of the Act.\n4-8\n3.\nNotice dated 23.03.2023 issued under section 148 of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961 (herein after referred as \"the Act\").\n9\n4.\nCopy of Approval u/s 151 dated 14.03.2023\n10-12\n5.\nIntimation dated 26.07.2023 regarding completion of assessment in\naccordance with procedure of section 144B of the Act.\n13\n6.\nNotice dated

INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), INDORE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN INDORE vs. GURDEEP SINGH CHHABRA, INDORE

148A(d) of\nthe Income Tax Act, and before issuance of notice under section 148 of Income Tax\nAct.\nINCOME TAX DEPARTMENT\nPRADUMAN KUMAR MISHRA\nITO 2(1), IND/\n(In case the document is digitally signed please\nrefer Digital Signature at the bottom of the page)\nIn response to above notice, the assessee filed reply dated 04.06.2022\n[Page

ADIM JATI SEVA SAHAKARI S ANSTHA BELKUND,BELKUND, BETUL vs. ITO, BETUL, BETUL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

reassessment proceedings under section 147. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal due to non-prosecution.", "held": "The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without adjudicating the merits, contrary to Section 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal also considered the assessee's explanation for non-prosecution due to being in a rural

INCOME TAX OFFICER 3(1), BHOPAL, METRO WALK BUILDING vs. RAMESH KUMAR SAHU, LEGAL HEIR OF SMT. RAMPYARI BAI, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiincome Tax Officer 3(1), Ramesh Kumar Sahu बनाम/ Bhopal L/H Of Late Smt. Ram Vs. Pyari Bai, 127 New Market, T.T. Nagar, Bhopal (Pan: Anhps5515N) (Revenue/Appellant) (Assessee/Respondent) Assessee By S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025

reassessment or recomputation under section 147, the Assessing Officer shall serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish within such period, as may be specified in the notice, a return of his income or the income of any other person in respect of which he is assessable under this Act during the previous year corresponding to the relevant

RAJESH KUMAR RATHORE,SEHORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 5, SEHORE, SEHORE

In the result, the impugned order is set aside as & by way of\nremand back to the file of the Ld

section 249(2) of the IT Act, the\nsame is not admitted.\n4. In view of the above facts, the appeal is dismissed for\nstatistical purpose and not required to be adjudicated on\nmerits.\n5. In result, the appeal is disposed off.\"\n2.5 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “Impugned Order\"\nhas preferred the instant second appeal before this

RAJ KUMAR PARMAR,SEHORE vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, SEHORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose, subject\nto payment of cost as mentioned above

section 148A and issued a notice dated 31.03.2022 u/s 148\nand thereby initiated proceeding of assessment u/s 147. The AO also issue\nnotices u/s 142(1) and show-cause notice to assessee. However, the\nassessee remained non-responsive. Ultimately, the AO passed ex-parte\nassessment-order u/s 144 assessing the impugned deposits of Rs.\n52,87,000/- as unexplained income

AKHILESH KUMAR PATEL,SHAHDOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER DHAR, DHAR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

148A(d). In response to such\nnotice, the assessee did not file any return. Thereafter, the AO issued\nnotices u/s 142(1) from time to time which were partly complied by assessee\nas noted by AO in Para 2 of assessment-order. Ultimately, the AO passed ex-\nparte assessment-order u/s 147 r.w.s.144 assessing the entire deposits/\nwithdrawals of Rs.1

LATE VINAYAK PURANIK THROUGH LEGAL HEIR YASH PURANIK,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(2), INDORE, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshilate Vinayak Puranik Income Tax Officer- बनाम/ Through L/H Yash 3(2), Vs. Puranik, Indore 7/4, New Palasia, Indore

reassessment proceedings against dead person is null and void basis para 5.5 of the judgment. Per contra Ld. DR stated that since the legal heir of the deceased assessee has participated in the assessment proceedings plea of Ld. AR is meritless. 4. Observations,findings & conclusions. 4.1 We now have to decide the legality, validity and the proprietery of the “impugned

MANISH KUMAR AGRAWAL,NEEMUCH vs. NFAC,DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

section 148A(d). The assessee filed return of income in response to such notice on 03.05.2023 declaring a total income of Rs.2,17,380/-. During proceeding, the AO asked the assessee to explain source of impugned deposits. The assessee filed reply but the AO was not satisfied. Ultimately, the AO made addition of Rs.1,10,79,638/- as unexplained income

SURESH JAT,BADNAWAR vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, DHAR, DHAR

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisuresh Jat, Ito, बनाम/ C/O S.V. Agrawal & Associate Dhar. Vs. Dadi Dham, 24-25, Joy Building Colony, Old Aplasia, Indore. (Pan: Anopj2666E) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ca Revenue By Shri Anup Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 08.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

148A(b) vide dated 21.02.2023 and same was duly served upon the assessee in time. Later on notice u/s 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 28.03.2023 was issued vide DIN No. ITBA/ASST/S/148-1/2022-23/1051516250(1) and same was delivered in due time. Page 3 of 20 Suresh Jat ITA No. 693/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2016-17 2.5 It is recorded in the “Impugned Assessment Order

BAJRANG LAL,UJJAIN, M.P. vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad

148A of the Act was required to be conducted through automated allocation and in a faceless manner as per Binding Hon'ble CBDTs Notification dated 29-03-2022 (Notification No. 18/2022) and therefore. proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act in the case of the appellant for Assessment Year 2017-18 on the basis of the said notice