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

FEDERATION OF RAJASTHAN TRADE AND INDUSTRY,JAIPUR vs. ITO-EXEMPTION WARD-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

Depreciation of Rs. 1,00,525/-) for the year under consideration. The Humble Appellant has also declared sale proceeds of building amounting of Rs. 61,00,000/- and after claiming indexing benefit, declared Long term capital loss of Rs. 50,450/-. That the Humble Appellant has claimed the cost of Property

RAMA SHANKER PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

148A in Act—It is well settled\nprinciple of interpretation that taxing statute is required to be construed strictly—\nImpugned order and proceedings are unsustainable in law-Assessee's petition\nallowed\".\nAlso refer Rajhans Processor v/s UOI in DB c Civit Writ Petition No.\n16985/2021 dt. 05.01.2023 of Raj. High Court.\nIn the case of Vijay Harish chandra Patel

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 80-IA of the Act in existence anywhere in the plants of the assessee. Findings of the survey have established wrong claim of deduction on account of profit shown from SWM, WTS and NIPU. Hence, the deductions claimed by the assessee are liable to be rejected. The assessee has submitted case of Jute Corporation of India

SOYALA GRAM SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED,TONK vs. ITO, TONK, TONK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

depreciation allowance or any other allowance or deduction for such assessment year (hereafter in this section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year). Explanation.—For the purpose of assessment or reassessment or recomputation under this section, the Assessing Officer may assess or reassess the income in respect of any issue, which has escaped assessment

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

148A of the Act of 1961 which has no\napplication in the present cases.\n18\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\n16. Learned counsel for the revenue does not dispute the legal position that where the\nbasis for reassessment is incriminating material and information collected during search,\nthe only legally permissible course of action is the one provided under section

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

Section 14A of the Act can\nbe made if the assessee had not earned any exempt income? - HELD THAT:- A\nperusal of the Memorandum of the Finance Bill, 2022 reveals that it explicitly stipulates\nthat the amendment made to Section 14A will take effect from 1st April, 2022 and will\napply in relation to the assessment year

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

148A of the Act of 1961 which has no\napplication in the present cases.\n\n18\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\n16. Learned counsel for the revenue does not dispute the legal position that where the\nbasis for reassessment is incriminating material and information collected during search,\nthe only legally permissible course of action is the one provided under

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

148A of the Act of 1961 which has no\napplication in the present cases.\n18\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\n16. Learned counsel for the revenue does not dispute the legal position that where the\nbasis for reassessment is incriminating material and information collected during search,\nthe only legally permissible course of action is the one provided under section

RAM KHILARI MEENA,DAUSA vs. ITO, DAUSA, DAUSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 139(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961. The case of the assessee case was reopened on the basis of information received by the ld. AO that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs. 55,50,000/- in his bank account and withdrew Rs. 1,18,75,00/- from the bank account. Notice u/s 148A(a) was issued

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

depreciation allowance or any other allowance, as the\r\ncase may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in this section and in\r\nsections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year).\"\r\n27. It is established principle of interpretation of statutes, that the Parliament is\r\npresumed to be not extravagant, in using the words