ITO WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR vs. M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY G-1/35 TO 37, 47, 48 EPIP, JEWELLERY ZONE, SITAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

reopened. The assessee had no control over the way an assessment order is drafted. In the circumstances it is submitted that since no independent application on mind was applied by Ld. AO while issuing notice u/s 148 and he simply proceeded on borrowed satisfaction reached by some other officials on the basis of statements recorded in the case of third

SHRI RAJ KUMAR MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

reopening of assessment u/s 148 and ld. CIT (A) erred in sustaining the same which is illegal, unjustified and liable to be quashed. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, ld. AO erred in assessing income u/s 144 by ignoring all the evidences of TDS

SMT. SONU KHANDELWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the A

reopening of the assessee is not valid and the same is quashed. The consequential reassessment is also quashed. 6. In the case for the A.Y. 2009-10, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: ITA 735 & 736/JP/2015_ 12 Sonu Khandelwal Vs ITO “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case

SMT. SONU KHANDELWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the A

reopening of the assessee is not valid and the same is quashed. The consequential reassessment is also quashed. 6. In the case for the A.Y. 2009-10, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: ITA 735 & 736/JP/2015_ 12 Sonu Khandelwal Vs ITO “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reopening was initiated on the premise of unaccounted\ncash deposits, the addition finally sustained was entirely different in nature, i.e.,\ndisallowance of deduction u/s 80P.\n2.4 This clear disconnect between the reasons recorded and the additions made is fatal to\nthe validity of the reassessment. The law requires that there must be a live link or nexus\nbetween the reasons

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reopening was initiated on the premise of unaccounted\ncash deposits, the addition finally sustained was entirely different in nature, i.e.,\ndisallowance of deduction u/s 80P.\n2.4 This clear disconnect between the reasons recorded and the additions made is fatal to\nthe validity of the reassessment. The law requires that there must be a live link or nexus\nbetween the reasons

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reopening was initiated on the premise of unaccounted\ncash deposits, the addition finally sustained was entirely different in nature, i.e.,\ndisallowance of deduction u/s 80P.\n2.4 This clear disconnect between the reasons recorded and the additions made is fatal to\nthe validity of the reassessment. The law requires that there must be a live link or nexus\nbetween the reasons

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reopening was initiated on the premise of unaccounted\ncash deposits, the addition finally sustained was entirely different in nature, i.e.,\ndisallowance of deduction u/s 80P.\n\n2.4 This clear disconnect between the reasons recorded and the additions made is fatal to\nthe validity of the reassessment. The law requires that there must be a live link or nexus\nbetween

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

TDS. (e)The ld. AO has disallowed the income of Rs.33,50,772/- (33,45,494/- +5,278/-) and also taxed the same @ Maximum Marginal Rate U/s 164(2). The Id. AO has alleged that the assessee trust is doing business activities in and not complying statutory provisions of the Act. Thus the AO has completed the assessment assessing

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

assessment. We do not think that any\nground is made out for disagreeing with the High Court in respect of the validity of the\norder of re- assessment for the year 1949-50. 9. The appeals fail and are dismissed with\ncosts.”\n5.15 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO v. Nawab Mir Barkat Ali Khan\nBahadur

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Assessing Officer has raised the query dated 25 september2017\nduring the assessment proceedings and the petitioner had responded to the same by its\nletters dated 10December 2017 and21 December 2017 justifying its stand. The non\nrejection of explanation in the Assessment order would amount to the Assessing officer\naccepting the view of the assessee, thus taking a view/forming an opinion

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

TDS. (e)The ld. AO has disallowed the income of Rs. 33,50,772/- (33,45,494/- +5,278/-) and also taxed the same @ Maximum Marginal Rate U/s 164(2). The Id. AO has alleged that the assessee trust is doing business activities in and not complying statutory provisions of the Act. Thus the AO has completed the assessment assessing

APOORVA SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), JAIPUR

reopened by issuing notice u/s 148. In response to the notice, it was submitted by the assessee that she was minor during the previous year relevant to impugned assessment year and it was requested to drop the reassessment proceedings initiated against her. It is also noted that no return of income was filed by the assessee in response to notice

SUDHIR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

assessment which is evident from the order sheet noting dated 23-06-2014 mentioning that the reasons for reopening u/s 147 have been provided to the assessee. It is noted from the available records that the ld. CIT(A) has elaborately discussed the issue in question and confirmed the action of the AO. We have taken into consideration the orders

JC FASHIONS,JAIPUR vs. ITO (T & J), JAIPUR

In the result , the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

reopening the assessment. Therefore, we hereby quash the assessment order dated 10/3/2015. The ground raised in this appeal are allowed. The appeal of the assessee is allowed. 4. Now, we take up the Revenue’s Appeal in ITA No 970/JP/2016, pertaining to the assessment year 2008-09. The revenue has raised followings grounds of appeal: 1. “Whether on the facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Assessing Officer cannot gather material or\nevidence at the back of the assessee and use it unilaterally. Evidence has to be\ntested on cross examination. Failure to afford opportunity to the assessee to cross-\nexamine a third party whose evidence is sought to be utilized would make the\nassessment void as held in the cases of KishinchandChellaram

POOJASHISH INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reopen the assessments or reassessments already made (without having the need to follow the strict provisions or complying with the strict conditions of Sections 147, 148 and 151) and determine the total income of the assessee. Such determination in the orders passed under Section 153A would be similar to the orders passed in any reassessment, where the total income determined

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

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

reopening of the assessment and even\nnot falling under the purview of Expln. 3 to s.147. Therefore, for the\npurpose of limitation under s.263(2), if the jurisdiction under s.263 is\ninvoked on an issue which was not subject-matter of reassessment, then\nthe limitation would reckon from the original assessment order and not\nfrom the reassessment order.”\nAccordingly