SHRI RAI SINGH SIHAG,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-1, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 441/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Cuke I.T.O. Vs. B-105, Vaishali Nagar, Ward- 3(1), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Bgvps 4485 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta & Shri S.L. Jain (Advs.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By :Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13/07/2017 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. The Reasons For Reopening Of The Assessment Not Valid :- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Ao Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Invoking Action U/S 147.The Notice For Reassessment Is So Hastily Issued Without Examining The Correct Factual & Legal Position. The Action For Reassessment Is Often Made Without Application Of Mind Fairly & Objectively The Ao. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 Itr 437 (Sc)

12 Section 37(2) provides that "the provisions of the Code relating to searches, shall so far as may be, apply to searches directed under Section 37(2). Reading the two sections together it merely means that the methodology prescribed for carrying out the search provided in Section 165 has to be generally followed. The expression

SHRI GOVIND NARAIN JOHARI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Although The Second Round Of Assessment Was Completed At The Directions Of Hon’Ble Itat.

12 M/s. Handmade Paper & Board Industries, Jaipur. properly served on the assessee. Since it is a case of non-issuance of notice within the prescribed time under section 143(2), therefore, the initiation of scrutiny proceedings itself was without jurisdiction conferred by the provisions of section 143 of the Act. The Hon’ble Kerala High Court in the case

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 be upheld as valid\nand in accordance with the law.\n2. The addition of ₹44,62,938/- under Section 2(22)(e) be upheld, as the\nAppellant has failed to disprove the findings of the AO.\n3.\nThe appeal of the Appellant be dismissed, and the order of the Ld. CIT(A)\nbe upheld

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

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

reassessment could not be issued against a person\ndeemed to be an agent of a non-resident under section 43, after the expiry of one\nyear from the end of the assessment year. The section was amended by section\n18 of the Finance Act, 1956, extending this period of limitation to two years from\nthe end of the assessment year

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

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

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

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SARITA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. PRIYA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

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

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SARITA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. TRILOK DEWAN, SIKAR

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA BANKA, SIKAR

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. PRIYA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

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

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

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

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

2) of section 150 as it stands, in our view, a fair and just\ninterpretation would be that the authority under the Act has been empowered only\nto reopen assessments, which have not already been closed and attained finality\ndue to the operation of the bar of limitation under section 149.\n19. This Court took similar view in the case

MAHENDRA SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

2, the order of reassessment passed by the\nTribunal is declared null and void. The questions are answered in favour of assessee and\nagainst the Department."\n\n30\nITA No. 654/JPR/2023\nMahendra Sharma vs. ITO .\n\nThus on the above legal position of law the notice under section 148 or\nproceedings under section 147/148 and consequent assessment order liable

SHRI SHRAVAN CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

reassessment order. 9. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that though the return might have been filed with Circle-2, Jaipur, however the processing under section 143(1) has been done by Circle-5, Jaipur and, therefore, the jurisdiction of AO Circle-5, Jaipur is based on the address shown in the PAN of the assessee

DESH RAJ JAKHAR,GORDHANPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NEEM KA THANA

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

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

Section 143(2) which is applicable for the assessment under consideration is being reproduced hereunder :- "Provided that no notice under clause (ii) shall be served on the assessee after the expiry of six months from the end of the financial year in which the return is furnished." Hence the 1.d. Assessing officer is having the time to initiate