RVR TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,MANDIDEEP vs. ADDL. CIT-RANGE-3, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal for A

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

reassessment. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the honourable CIT(A) was not justified in upholding that the receipt from job work of mixing of rubber at Rs. 34,19,894 was not the business receipts/income and in confirming the same was income from other sources. 3.On the facts and in the circumstances

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SINGH ,BHOPAL vs. THE PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 27.12.2017 has been considered to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of revenue for the following reasons: "On perusal of the assessment order and case records, it is noticed that the assesses made cash deposits of amount of Rs.43,91,275/- and claimed this amount

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), BHOPAL vs. SHRI NEERAJ MANDLOI, NEW DELHI

Bench: Hon’Ble Manish Borad & Hon’Ble Madhumita Royassessment Year 2009-10

reassessment could have be done only u/s 153C and not u/s 147 and thus the impugned assessment order was liable to be quashed as being without Shri Neeraj Mandloi ITA No.680/Ind/2020 & C.O.No.04/Ind/2020 jurisdiction. 3.That the Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that section 153 C overrides section 147/148 and thus proceedings which are initiated pursuant to document seized under