SANJEEV AGRAWAL ,BHOPAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL-2, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed

reassessment\nproceedings being ab-initio void.\"\nPage 13 of 33\nSanjeev Agrawal\nITA No. 38/Ind/2024 – AY 2017-18\n(v)\nIn TANMAC India vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle I,\nPondicherry [2017] 78 taxmann.com 155 (Madras) [19-12-2016],\nit was held thus:\n“8. A perusal of the Reasons would indicate that the assessing officer\nproceeds solely

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

M/S RADHISHWARI DEVLOPERS P LTD,INDORE vs. PR CIT -2 INDORE, INDORE

In the result, Assessee’s appeal in ITANo

Bench: Hon’Ble Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Manish Boradvirtual Hearing Assessment Year 2013-14 M/S. Radhishwari Developers P. Ltd. (Now Known As R.C. Warehousing Pvt. Ltd. ) Indore : Appellant Pan :Aafcr1916A V/S Pr. Cito-2 : Respondent Indore Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema Sr. Adv. With Gagan Tiwari & Piyush Parashar Advs. Revenue By Shri S.S. Mantri, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 24.05.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 20.07.2021

reassessment by invoking the provisions of section 263 may kindly be dropped. Without prejudice to the above as far as merit of the issues reaised in show-cause notice in question are concerned, we have to submit that the learned Assessing Officer has issued notices u/s 133(6) in loan creditor companies (supra). That after getting the requisite details

THE DCIT ,CENTRAL-1, BHOPAL vs. M/S VATIKA BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS, BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Dcit (Central)-I, M/S. Vatika Builders & Bhopal Developers, Vatika Parisar, बनाम/ Near Petrol Pump, Vs. Lalghati, Bhopal

reassessment u/s 147 will be invalid, if no notice u/s 143(2) was issued and will not be save even by section 292BB, even if the assessee participates in the proceedings. The Revenue can avail section 292BB only if notice u/s 143(2) was issued and not when admitted position is that no notice was issued as in the instant

PIYUSH JUNEJA,KHANDWA vs. JCIT RANGE-4 INDORE, INDORE

In the result, the appeal if the assessee is allowed in terms as

Bench: Shri Manish Boradassessment Year : 2015-16 Shri Piyush Juneja, Jt.Commissioner 10,Anand Nagar, Of Income-Tax, बनाम/ Khandwa Range 4, Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan : Aolpj9133N Assessee By Shri Gagan Tiwari, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 30.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 01.08.2024

reassessment proceedings have also been challenged separately by the assessee before Ld. CIT(A), but the same is still pending for adjudication before the Ld. CIT(A). However, against the penalty order u/s 271E of the Act, the appeal to Ld. CIT(A) has been decided against the assessee. In the appeal against the levy of penalty u/s 271E