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

29-32) AY 2011-12 order dated 20.07.2018-80IB(10)(f) prospective 3. During the year under appeal, the total sales consisted only of the flats of Phase 1.In all 12 flats were sold aggregating to Rs. 2,96,71,000. None of the flats sold were violative of the provisions of 80IB (10) (e) & (f). 4. Another issue

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

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 Sh. Kapil Taneja vs. DCIT (i) After considering the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, notice issued u/s 148 of the Act is barred by limitation. (ii) Reopening by jurisdictional Assessing officer and by Faceless Assessing Officer, which is contrary to the specific provisions of section 151A (iii) Notice u/s 148 being issued

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-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)

10. Per contra, ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the finding recorded in the order of the ld. CIT(A) so far as it relates to the appeal of the revenue. As regards the cross objection he submitted that ld. CIT(A) should refrain from giving direction. In support of the arguments advanced before us he mainly repeated what

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)

10. Per contra, ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the finding recorded in the order of the ld. CIT(A) so far as it relates to the appeal of the revenue. As regards the cross objection he submitted that ld. CIT(A) should refrain from giving direction. In support of the arguments advanced before us he mainly repeated what

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

reassessment under Sections 139,147,148,149,151 & 153. " In view of the above discussion, the assessment completed u/s 144 deserves to be quashed. The order of the Learned CIT(A) also deserved to be quashed on this ground. Additional Ground No.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned

LATE SHRI JITENDRA NAGAR THROUGH HIS L/R SMT. DEEPIKA NAGAR,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD BARAN, BARAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

29 Late Shri Jitendra Nagar through L/R Smt. Deepika Nagar, Baran. 6.1 With respect of operation of new section 149 of the Act, the following may be seen: Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the new law shall operate and all the • defences available to assessees under section 149 of the new law and whatever rights are available

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. We find from the order of the Tribunal and also on the facts as has been culled out from the assessment order in question that there is no element of failure to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. Therefore, there was no justification for the department for invocation of proceeding under Section

RSD CONTAINERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

29 RSD Containers Pvt Ltd. vs ITO provisions of Section 149 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. As per Section 149(1)(b), read with the explanation thereto, reassessment proceedings for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18 can be initiated up to 31.03.2028 where the alleged escapement exceeds Rs. 50 lakhs and is represented in the form of an asset

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S N. M. AGROFOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

10]" 23 DCIT vs. M/s N. M. Agrofood Products Pvt. Ltd. (vi) The head note in the case of CIT Vs Raj Kumar Arora [2014] 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) is as under: "Section 153A, read with section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment in case of (Scope of assessment) - Assessment year 2000 01 - Whether Assessing

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. RATAN KANWAR RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

29. The argument of the counsel for the appellant if taken to its logical end would mean that even in cases where the appeal arising out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT(A), ITAT and the High Court, on a notice issued under Section 153A of the Act, the AO would have power to undo what

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. RATAN KANWAR RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

29. The argument of the counsel for the appellant if taken to its logical end would mean that even in cases where the appeal arising out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT(A), ITAT and the High Court, on a notice issued under Section 153A of the Act, the AO would have power to undo what

ACIT, CC-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MAHENDRA SINGH RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

29. The argument of the counsel for the appellant if taken to its logical end would mean that even in cases where the appeal arising out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT(A), ITAT and the High Court, on a notice issued under Section 153A of the Act, the AO would have power to undo what

ACIT, CC-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MAHENDRA SINGH RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

29. The argument of the counsel for the appellant if taken to its logical end would mean that even in cases where the appeal arising out of the completed assessment has been decided by the CIT(A), ITAT and the High Court, on a notice issued under Section 153A of the Act, the AO would have power to undo what

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

reassessment.” Thus, it is settled proposition of law that the notice issued by the authority other than the prescribed authority is not valid and consequential order passed by the ld. CIT(E) is without jurisdiction. The show cause notice confers the jurisdiction to proceed and to pass the order. In case the notice itself is not valid then the jurisdiction