SHRI ASHOK DHARENDRA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 256/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Ashok Dharendra, Cuke D.C.I.T. 23, Shivraj Niketan Scheme, Vs. Central Circle-3, Gautam Marg, Nr Vaishali Jaipur. Nagar Circle, Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aavpd 6554 B Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Manish Agarwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri S. Najmi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/02/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 12 /04/2022 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- 4, Jaipur Dated 01/12/2017 For The A.Y. 2015-16 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 153B(1)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- Made In The Assessment Completed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 153B(1)(B) Solely On The Basis Of Statements Recorded During The Course Of Search Which Stood Retracted By The Assessee Through An Affidavit Filed. Thus, The Addition Made Solely On The Basis Of Such Retracted Statements Deserves To Be Deleted.

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act), wherein following grounds have been taken. “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- made in the assessment completed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153B

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

153B, as stood at the relevant point of time, provided 12 Months from the end of the Financial Year in which search is completed or 18 Months from the end of the Financial Year in which the seized books of account or documents or assets (“Seized records” for short) are handed over u/s 153C to the Assessing Officer having jurisdiction

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S KOTA DALL MILL, KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the IT Act. 2. Common grounds have been raised by the assessee as well as by the department in these appeals. However, for the sake of convenience and the issue involved in these appeals, the assessment years 2010-11 to 13-14 are taken as a separate group of cross appeals due to the reason that

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the IT Act. 2. Common grounds have been raised by the assessee as well as by the department in these appeals. However, for the sake of convenience and the issue involved in these appeals, the assessment years 2010-11 to 13-14 are taken as a separate group of cross appeals due to the reason that

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the IT Act. 2. Common grounds have been raised by the assessee as well as by the department in these appeals. However, for the sake of convenience and the issue involved in these appeals, the assessment years 2010-11 to 13-14 are taken as a separate group of cross appeals due to the reason that

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the IT Act. 2. Common grounds have been raised by the assessee as well as by the department in these appeals. However, for the sake of convenience and the issue involved in these appeals, the assessment years 2010-11 to 13-14 are taken as a separate group of cross appeals due to the reason that

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

section 12A(1)(b) states that: [(1)] The provisions of section 11 and section 12 shall not apply inrelation to the income of any trust or institution unless the followingconditions are fulfilled, namely:- (b)where the total income of the trust or institution as computedunder this Act without giving effect to [the provisions of section 11 andsection 12 exceeds

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act carried

RAJESH PRODUCTS,TONK ,RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

Appeal is dismissed

153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, by ACIT, Central Circle-01, Jaipur. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. That on facts and in law, the impugned search assessment order dated 29.12.2017 passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer ("AO") u/s. 143(3)/153B(1)(b) of the Income

LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

Section 145 of the Act. Therefore, the aforesaid submission made on behalf of the revenue also does not deserve acceptance.” 18. It is further observed that the AO has not brought any special reason as to why he is taking a departure from the past settled history between the assessee and the Department in as much as all along