GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JPR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the results all the appeals filed by the assessee ITA Nos

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the approval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as nothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section

GOVINDAM EXPORT,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

bogus purchases. He further submitted that the\napproval of higher authorities as required u/s 153D was not obtained as\nnothing has been mentioned about the obtaining of approval from\nAdditional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner as mandated in section

PRAMILA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(5), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

153D have prevalence over regular provisions for assessment or\nreassessment under sections 148 & 147/148 - Held, yes - Whether therefore, where\nbasis for initiation of section 148 proceedings in case of assessee was material seized\nrelating to or belonging to assessee during search conducted on ‘M' Group, notices\nissued under section 148 and impugned orders rejecting objections filed to issuance of\nnotice

SH. KAPIL TANEJA,JAIPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

153D have prevalence over regular provisions for assessment or reassessment under sections 148 & 147/148 - Held, yes - Whether therefore, where basis for initiation of section 148 proceedings in case of assessee was material seized relating to or belonging to assessee during search conducted on ‘M’ Group, notices issued under section 148 and impugned orders rejecting objections filed to issuance of notice

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

153D have prevalence over regular\nprovisions for assessment or reassessment under sections 148 & 147/148 - Held,\nyes - Whether therefore, where basis for initiation of section 148 proceedings in\ncase of assessee was material seized relating to or belonging to assessee during\nsearch conducted on ‘M' Group, notices issued under section 148 and impugned\norders rejecting objections filed to issuance of notice

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the DCIT vs. Sapna Karnani seized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted or requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to apply to the regular proceedings and also in cases where no incriminating material

BRIJ BIHARI AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1 , JAIPUR

purchase contained some entries pertaining to the\nindividuals/ concerns of Maverick group as also some other persons,\nand had an amount of Rs. 1,76,342/- against the name of assessee.\nOn the basis of this information reasons were recorded u/s 147 and a\nnotice was issued to the assessee u/s 148 of the Act. The copy of\nreasons recorded

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the\n17\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\nseized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted\nor requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to\napply to the regular proceedings and also in cases where

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the\n17\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\nseized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted\nor requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to\napply to the regular proceedings and also in cases where

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the\n\n17\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\nseized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted\nor requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to\napply to the regular proceedings and also in cases where

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

153D have prevalence over the regular provisions for assessment or reassessment under Section 143 & 147/148. 27. Section 153A and 153C starts with non-obstante clause. The procedure for assessment/reassessment in Section 153A, 153C in cases of search or requisition has an overriding effect to the regular provisions for assessment or reassessment under Sections

RAJESH PRODUCTS,TONK ,RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

bogus purchases has led\nto mushrooming of facilitators, commonly referred to as 'accommodation entry\nproviders who rotate funds for such purchase/sales in an attempt to authenticate\nsuch transactions. Many a times the entities doing genuine business also\nprovides accommodation bills and is it not necessary that the accommodation\nentry provider has to be exclusively into such practice. There are number

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. AMRAPALI JEWELS PVT. LTD. , JAIPUR

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

Bench: Him.

153D of the Act. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A)- 4, Jaipur has erred in sustaining the very invocation of provision of Section 69B of the Act by the Ld. AO as bad in law. 4. Under the facts and circumstances of the case

LOVELY PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

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

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

section 147 in the reason was typographical error, if considered correct, 46 Lovely promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT non-observation of such serious typographical error by two senior officers i.e. (i) Range Head forwarding reason to approval authority with recommendation for approval and (ii) Pr. CIT, approving Authority. Non observation of such serious typographical error led to the conclusion that

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

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA no

section\n11 (2) and 11(1)(a) of the\nAct\n33,50,772/-\n33,50,772/-\n5.\nUnverifiable Creditors\n16,75,286/-\n16,75,286/-\n6.\n15% of Construction\nExpenses\n1,20,00,440/-\n1,20,00,440/-\n7.\nDisallowance of Rs\n3,69,567 out of total\nexpenses

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

section\n11 (2) and 11(1)(a) of the\nAct\n33,50,772/-\n33,50,772/-\n\n5.\nUnverifiable Creditors\n16,75,286/-\n16,75,286/-\n\n6.\n15% of Construction\nExpenses\n1,20,00,440/-\n1,20,00,440/-\n\n7.\nDisallowance of Rs\n3,69,567 out of total\nexpenses