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)

section 147, therefore, cannot be sustained. As the error here is one of jurisdiction it is not necessary for the assessee to have recourse to the remedies by way of appeal, revision, etc. It is well settled that when a jurisdictional error is brought to the notice of this court such errors are capable of being corrected by this court

SHRI MADHO LAL SAINI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

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

Section 10A. The issue, however, before the Court, is as to whether that can form the basis of the reopening of the assessment beyond a period of four years. The reasons which have been disclosed by the Assessing Officer do not set out as to what facts the assessee had failed to fully and truly disclose. Even a prima facie

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

10A, 80-IA, 80-IAB, 80-IB, 80-\r\nIC, 80-ID or 80-IE of the Act, and Section 143(1)(a)(v) was only post-\r\namendment that was made available on the statute vide the Finance Act, 2021\r\nw.e.f. 01.04.2021 been made compatible, and in fact workable, to facilitate a\r\ndisallowance contemplated u/s.80P w.e.f. A.Y.2021-22

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

reassessment proceedings were initiated. The\nsame data already a part of the file has been looked upon with different perspective\nby different incumbents.\nThus, there is no omission on the part of the assessee to provide full and true disclosure of\nthe information, hence the reopening is due to change of opinion and is bad in the eyes of\nlaw

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 10A benefit claimed in the covering letter of the return filed u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. It is also well-settled on the anvil of Hon'ble Apex Court decision in SunEngineering Works (P) Ltd 's case (supra) that no fresh exemption/benefit can be claimed by the assessee in the course of reassessment

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

section 10A benefit claimed in the covering letter of the return filed u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. It is also well-settled on the anvil of Hon'ble Apex Court decision in SunEngineering Works (P) Ltd 's case (supra) that no fresh exemption/benefit can be claimed by the assessee in the course of reassessment

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

section 10A benefit claimed in the covering letter of the return filed u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. It is also well-settled on the anvil of Hon'ble Apex Court decision in SunEngineering Works (P) Ltd 's case (supra) that no fresh exemption/benefit can be claimed by the assessee in the course of reassessment

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

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

section 10A benefit claimed in the covering letter of the return filed u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. It is also well-settled on the anvil of Hon'ble Apex Court decision in SunEngineering Works (P) Ltd 's case (supra) that no fresh exemption/benefit can be claimed by the assessee in the course of reassessment

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 10A benefit claimed in the covering letter of the return filed u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. It is also well-settled on the anvil of Hon'ble Apex Court decision in SunEngineering Works (P) Ltd 's case (supra) that no fresh exemption/benefit can be claimed by the assessee in the course of reassessment

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

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

section 10A benefit claimed in the covering letter of the return filed u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. It is also well-settled on the anvil of Hon'ble Apex Court decision in SunEngineering Works (P) Ltd 's case (supra) that no fresh exemption/benefit can be claimed by the assessee in the course of reassessment

ALL INDIA SECURITISATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF SECURITY INTEREST ASSOCIATION,CHITRANJAN MARG vs. CIT EXEMPTION, KAILASH HEIGHT,

In the result, the both appeals of the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

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

10A vide PB No.133-136.\nRegistration u/s 80G was granted to the assessee on 06.10.2021, valid till A.Y. 2024-25 vide unique\nregistration number AAITA7176MF20210 under section 80G(5)(iv) vide PB No.130-132. And provisional\nregistration was granted on 06.10.2021 vide unique registration number AAITA7176MF20210 under\nsub-clause (iv) of clause (12) of sub-section(5) of section

ISYS SOFTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. CIT (A), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment are under sec. 147 and 148 of the Act and they are on a completely different footing and, therefore, do not merit consideration for the purpose of this case. 19. Even though the period of three years would be a reasonable period as prescribed under section 153 of the Act for completion of proceedings, we have been told that

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E) , JAIPUR

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

reassessment\nunder section 147 in proceedings for fresh assessment pursuant to directions of AAC for purpose\nof re-computation of income after giving proper hearing to assessee, when issues regarding\nlegality and/or validity of those proceedings have already been decided by AAC while remitting\nmatter to Assessing Officer - Held, yes Whether, similarly, first appellate authority, in an\nappeal against order

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

reassessment.\n5.\nThe said section is not applicable in the present as the contentions raised are\nrelating to illegality of the Impugned Order as well as exercising power without authority\nof law and without jurisdiction.\n6.\nIn view of the above, the Ld. CIT(E) has wrongly contended that Appellant has\nparticipated in the proceedings therefore, it is precluded from

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment proceeding. Therefore, he cannot take a plea now that the proceedings were invalid. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Honda siel Power Products Ltd. vs. DCIT (2011) 197 Taxman 415 (Del.) has stated that the law postulates a duty on every assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts for its assessment

ISHAN ARORA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

10A) and purchase invoices confirm the same. Total turnover was Rs.25.61 lakhs, mostly in cash, deposited in the bank. In this context, the Bank statement for the FY 2007-08 is also attached herewith as Annexure-7 for your kind consideration 13 Ishan Arora vs. ITO 3. That the Ld. AO erred in treating ₹2.84.255 as unexplained expenditure

GA INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-2

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

10A/ 10AA. Various details and explanations as required to examine the above mentioned issue were sought by ld.AO, in response to which assessee furnished replies alongwith supporting documentary evidences, such as ITR, Audited Financial Statements, Audit Reports u/s 10CCB in respect of all the projects, Work orders, Assessment orders passed in earlier years, opinion obtained from expert regarding eligibility