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, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. SUPREME POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the results the appeal of the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

153D and Section 148 are different. Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the seized material related to or belonged to person 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 is seized during

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

gains, nor is it income from 'other sources' because the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

gains, nor is it income from 'other sources' because the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

gains, nor is it income from 'other sources' because the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

gains, nor is it income from 'other sources' because the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

gains, nor is it income from 'other sources' because the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of\nthe above observations

gains, nor is it income from 'other sources'\nbecause the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained\ninvestments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as\ndeemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or\nexpenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily\nexplained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

gains, nor is it income from 'other sources'\nbecause the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained\ninvestments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as\ndeemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or\nexpenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily\nexplained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

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

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

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF), JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

153D has vitiated the assessment order.\n3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred\nin upholding the addition amounting to Rs.16,21,91,214/- (albeit as part of capital\ngains). The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the\nfacts of the case. Relief may please

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF),JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CENTRAL CIRCLE

153D has vitiated the assessment order.\n3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred \nin upholding the addition amounting to Rs.16,21,91,214/- (albeit as part of capital \ngains). The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the \nfacts of the case. Relief may please

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF), JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

153D has vitiated the assessment order. \n\n3. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) has erred \nin upholding the addition amounting to Rs.16,21,91,214/- (albeit as part of capital \ngains). The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the \nfacts of the case. Relief

RASHLEELA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

153D of the I.T. Act, 1961 of the\nJt. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Range, Jaipur vide her\noffice letter No. Jt.CIT(C)/Approval, u/s 153D/2020-21/659 dated\n24.06.2021.\n4.\nOn culmination of the assessment proceedings, the Id. PCIT\ncalled for the assessment records as per provision of section 263\nof the Act to examine the same. Ld. PCIT upon examination

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

gainful guidance is taken from the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Hero Cycles [1997] 228 ITR 463 (SC) wherein it was held that circulars bind the ITO but will not bind the appellate authority or the Tribunal or the Court or even the assessee. … … 14. Considering the facts on record, perusal