INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

reassessment\norder passed by Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 is\nbad in law—Assessee's grounds allowed.\nPrayer: Thus in view of the above facts, circumstances and the legal position of\nlaw the proceedings so initiated and assessment so passed may kindly be\nquashed.\n4. The Id. AO has denied the exemption u/s 10

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GURU PRAGYA INFRA (P) LTD., JAIPUR

12. Whether where some of the flats in a block are not fulfilling the condition of allotment of the flat, entire deduction is to be disallowed or the claim is to be restricted proportionately? 12.1 In this regard, the ld AR has submitted that: (a) The AO has observed that assessee has allotted more than one flat to the persons

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

10 assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search took place and the broken period of up to the date of search ITA 437/JP/2017_ 29 DCIT Vs. Vimal Chand Surana (HUF) was also included in the block period. After the introduction of new sections, i.e. section 153A to 153C, the single block assessment concept was done way with

DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JOY SYNDICATE & ENCLAVE PVT. LTD. , JAIPUR

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

section 801B (10) by Finance Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.2010 were prospective in application: Sr. No. Case law PB Refernce 1. Emgeen Holding (P.) Ltd v DCIT (2011) 12 Taxmann.com 16 468 (Mumbai) 2. ITO Jaswant A v ITO and Patel Punam Chand N vs ITO 17 (2015) 58 taxmann.com 135 (Ahmedabad- Trib.)/(2015)38 ITR 135 3. DCIT v Mandavi

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 10. Thus on a plain reading of Section 153A of the income-tax Act, it becomes clear that on initiation of proceedings under Section 153A, it is only the assessment/reassessment proceedings that are pending on the date of conducting search under Section 132 or making requisition under Section 132A of the Act stand

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 10. Thus on a plain reading of Section 153A of the income-tax Act, it becomes clear that on initiation of proceedings under Section 153A, it is only the assessment/reassessment proceedings that are pending on the date of conducting search under Section 132 or making requisition under Section 132A of the Act stand

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment that stood abated shall stand revived. 10. Thus on a plain reading of Section 153A of the income-tax Act, it becomes clear that on initiation of proceedings under Section 153A, it is only the assessment/reassessment proceedings that are pending on the date of conducting search under Section 132 or making requisition under Section 132A of the Act stand

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SILVERTOSS COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed

10. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. Undisputedly, the assessment for the assessment year 2012-13 was not pending on the date of search on 23.08.2017. The assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the I.T. Act. Thus the assessment for the assessment year 2012- 13 was not got abated

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

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

12 months. Transaction was made through SEBI\nregistered broker. The broker issued bills of sale to the assessee. The\nshares were sold on the prices of Bombay Stock Exchange Limited of the\nparticular date & particular time. The assessee paid security transaction\ntax, service tax, etc, and thereby the assessee justify his claim u/s 10 (38)\nof the Act. He also

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

12,36,40,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the IT Act on account of unexplained unsecured loans allegedly obtained by the assessee from M/s. Birla Arts Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Teac Consultant Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified

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

12,36,40,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the IT Act on account of unexplained unsecured loans allegedly obtained by the assessee from M/s. Birla Arts Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Teac Consultant Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified

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

12,36,40,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the IT Act on account of unexplained unsecured loans allegedly obtained by the assessee from M/s. Birla Arts Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Teac Consultant Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified

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

12,36,40,000/- made by the AO u/s 68 of the IT Act on account of unexplained unsecured loans allegedly obtained by the assessee from M/s. Birla Arts Pvt. Ltd., M/s. Teac Consultant Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI VIMAL CHAND SURANA(HUF), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

10 assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year in which search took place and the broken period of up to the date of search was also included in the block period. After the introduction of new sections, i.e. section 153A to 153C, the single block assessment concept was done way with the new scheme of assessment of search cases where

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)

10. Copy of Reply dated 30.01.2023 to notice issued u/s 143(2) read with 61-63 11. section 147 Copy of draft Assessment order dated 02.05.2023 64-68 12. Copy of Written Submission dated 13.01.2025 in filed before Ld.CIT(A) 69-74 13. 7. The ld. AR of the assessee in addition to the above written submission so filed vehemently

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act—by invoking Section 150 and relying on CBDT Instruction No. 1/2023— is ex-facie without jurisdiction, contrary to binding judicial precedent, and violative of the appellate framework under Sections 250/251 of the Act. 4. It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal, in exercise of its plenary powers under Section

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act—by invoking Section 150 and relying on CBDT Instruction No. 1/2023— is ex-facie without jurisdiction, contrary to binding judicial precedent, and violative of the appellate framework under Sections 250/251 of the Act. 4. It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal, in exercise of its plenary powers under Section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SHRI RAJLAXMI DENIM, BHILWARA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

10 DCIT Vs. Shri Rajlaxmi Denim that any proceedings for the assessment or reassessment of the assessee which are pending on the date of initiation of search or making requisition shall abate. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is empowered to assess or reassess the total income of six assessment years relevant to the immediately preceding assessment year relevant to the previous