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 order which has attained finality, unless the materials gathered in the course of the proceedings under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act establish that the reliefs granted under the finalised DCIT vs. M/s Royal Jewellers assessment/reassessment were contrary to the facts unearthed during the course of 153A proceedings. The above quoted passage was also approved by Bombay High

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 order which has attained finality, unless the materials gathered in the course of the proceedings under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act establish that the reliefs granted under the finalised DCIT vs. M/s Royal Jewellers assessment/reassessment were contrary to the facts unearthed during the course of 153A proceedings. The above quoted passage was also approved by Bombay High

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 order which has attained finality, unless the materials gathered in the course of the proceedings under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act establish that the reliefs granted under the finalised DCIT vs. M/s Royal Jewellers assessment/reassessment were contrary to the facts unearthed during the course of 153A proceedings. The above quoted passage was also approved by Bombay High

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

115 has dealt with the procedure pre and post 1.4.2017 on the entitlement of business loss set off by the assessee. The CBDT Circular reads thus: "In this regard, it has been brought to the notice of the Central Board of Direct Taxes (the Board) that in assessments prior to assessment year 2017-18 while some of the Assessing Officers

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)

Reassessment pursuant to material found in search can be done through recourse to section 153C only and not by invoking the provisions of section 147/148. 1.12. The provisions of section 153C are over-riding in nature and contain non obstante clause for sections 139,147,148,149,151 and 153. 1.13. Section 147 and 153C are not interchangeable

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 5.5. The appellant submitted that the AO has satisfied himself that appellant had taken accommodation entry in the shape of unsecured loans. The appellant submitted that it raised objections before AO against such reasons wherein it was categorically contended that appellant had not taken any unsecured loans from any of the party mentioned

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

reassessment is not legally invalid. The\nappellant relied on various judicial decisions that the AO cannot reopen concluded\nassessment merely to re-examine any transaction for non-application of his mind on the\nmaterials already with him.\n\n5.13 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Calcutta Discount co. v. ITO (1961)\n41 ITR 191 held that once

SANSKRITI BUILD-DEV PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 6(2), JAIPUR

18. In view of the above findings, this appeal filed by the assessee deserves to be allowed

Bench: Learned Cit(A), While Challenging Assessment Order Dated 29.05.2023, Relating To The Assessment Year 2014-15. Said Appeal Has Been Dismissed Vide Impugned Order Dated 29.01.2025, Passed By Learned Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Whereby Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer.

reassessment notice under Section 148 of the new regime within the time limit surviving under the Income Tax Act read with TOLA. All notices issued beyond the surviving period are time barred and liable to be set aside; 115

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

reassessment order or just\na day before when it was passed and the petitioner participated in proceedings. In\nthe present case, the challenge to the initiation of proceedings was subjudice\nbefore this Court and during the pendency, the order under Section 147 of the Act\nwas passed.\n\n18. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

115/- were shell company of Kolkata based from which the assessee have taken accommodation entry in the nature of bogus unsecured loan and also paid commission and also claimed interest expenses in the return of income. Considering that facts a show cause notice dated 27.03.2021 was issued to the assessee through which the assessee was asked to furnish explanation with

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

115]C been reduced by the amount of income in respect of which particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished: Provided that where the amount of income in respect of which particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished on any issue is considered both under the provisions contained in section 11518 or section 1151C

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA , JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

115]C been reduced by the amount of income in respect of which particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished:\nProvided that where the amount of income in respect of which particulars have been concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished on any issue is considered both under the provisions contained in section 11518 or section 1151C

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S RIGID CONDUCTORS (RAJ.) PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S CHOKHI DHANI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search

DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX, LIC BUILDING vs. M/S GEE VEE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S VISION ESTATES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

115 taxmann.com 220/273 Taxman 274 (SC). (ii) There has to be incriminating material recovered during search qua assessee in each of years for purposes of framing an assessment under section 153A – Principal CIT v. Ms. Lata Jain (2016) 384 ITR 543 (Delhi). (iii) Assessment under section 153A can be made only on the basis of incriminating material found in search

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

section even though said issue did not find mention in the reasons\r\nrecorded and the notice issued under s.148. Since there was confusion\r\nprevailing with regard to the powers of the AO to assess or reassess on the\r\nissues for which no reasons were recorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as\r\nclarificatory. Now, after

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

115]C been reduced by\nthe amount of income in respect of which particulars have been concealed or\ninaccurate particulars have been furnished:\nProvided that where the amount of income in respect of which particulars have\nbeen concealed or inaccurate particulars have been furnished on any issue is\nconsidered both under the provisions contained in section 11518 or section 1151C

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

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassess the total income of six assessment years. Once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any undisclosed income found during search or/and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return or which is not unearthed during the search, in order to find out what