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

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, 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

reassessment matters nor vests any such power in the Id.\nCIT(A). Even other wise the Instruction cannot substitute the independent\nstatutory preconditions under Sections 147/148 read with Section 149,\nwhich provides the timelines for issuance of notice of reopening. Provision\nof such section must be satisfied by the Id. AO at any given point of time,\nwhen the jurisdiction

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

reassessment proceedings have been initiated for earlier years when the deduction stood allowed in scrutiny assessment. DCIT vs. M/s Joy Syndicate & Enclave Pvt. Ltd. 8. Ld. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal on proper examination of facts and law. However, reference to earlier decisions on the same issues in assessee’s own appeals does not mean that

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)

section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding. 16. Section 153A bears the heading "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is "well settled as held by the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions that the heading or the Section Can be regarded as a key to the interpretation of the operative portion

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)

section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding. 16. Section 153A bears the heading "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is "well settled as held by the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions that the heading or the Section Can be regarded as a key to the interpretation of the operative portion

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)

section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding. 16. Section 153A bears the heading "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is "well settled as held by the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions that the heading or the Section Can be regarded as a key to the interpretation of the operative portion

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)

20 March 2020 to 31 March 2021, till 30 June 2021. All the reassessment notices under challenge in the present appeals were issued from 1 April 2021 to 30 June 2021 under the old regime. Ashish Agarwal (supra) deemed these reassessment notices under the old regime as show cause notices under the new regime with effect from the date

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

JUHI BHANDARI, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassess taking into consideration the other\nmaterial in respect of completed assessments/unabated assessments.\nMeaning thereby, in respect of completed/unabated assessments, no\naddition can be made by the AO in absence of any incriminating\nmaterial found during the course of search under Section 132 or\nrequisition under Section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the\ncompleted/unabated assessments can be re-opened

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

10. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified in holding the partner’s capital as genuine despite the fact that CIT (A) in the subsequent year on the basis of evidences available on record held M/s. Doshi Management Pvt. Ltd. a company in which 3 alleged partners namely M/s. Banshidhar

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

10. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified in holding the partner’s capital as genuine despite the fact that CIT (A) in the subsequent year on the basis of evidences available on record held M/s. Doshi Management Pvt. Ltd. a company in which 3 alleged partners namely M/s. Banshidhar

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

10. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified in holding the partner’s capital as genuine despite the fact that CIT (A) in the subsequent year on the basis of evidences available on record held M/s. Doshi Management Pvt. Ltd. a company in which 3 alleged partners namely M/s. Banshidhar

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

10. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) was justified in holding the partner’s capital as genuine despite the fact that CIT (A) in the subsequent year on the basis of evidences available on record held M/s. Doshi Management Pvt. Ltd. a company in which 3 alleged partners namely M/s. Banshidhar

URBAN IPROVEMENT TRUST,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, appeals/cross objection are allowed for statistical purposes

reassessment proceedings, initiated under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as invalid/nullity and thereby not quashing the assessment order itself passed in consequence thereof. 2) Under the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kota has erred in not quashing/nullifying the ex-parte assessment order passed under section

URBAN IPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, KOTA

In the result, appeals/cross objection are allowed for statistical purposes

reassessment proceedings, initiated under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as invalid/nullity and thereby not quashing the assessment order itself passed in consequence thereof. 2) Under the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kota has erred in not quashing/nullifying the ex-parte assessment order passed under section

ITO, KOTA vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, appeals/cross objection are allowed for statistical purposes

reassessment proceedings, initiated under section 147/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as invalid/nullity and thereby not quashing the assessment order itself passed in consequence thereof. 2) Under the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Kota has erred in not quashing/nullifying the ex-parte assessment order passed under section