ARUN BHARDWAJ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1 , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

120 read with Section 124 of the Act and the notification issued by the Board. 20. Thus, in our opinion, the appeal has to succeed on ground nos. 1 and 2 alone. The appeal accordingly stands allowed as aforesaid. Order pronounced in the open court on 15/01/2024.” In the matter of Bidi Supply Co. v. Union of India

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

Section 194 and 200 were challenged. It was noted in P. RatnakarRao and others V. Govt. Of A.P. and others (1996 (5) SCC 359) that the discretion given under Section 200(1) to the State Government to prescribe maximum rates for compounding the offence is not unguided, uncanalised and arbitrary. It was, inter alia, held as follows: ……………….. ………………. It is indisputable

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)

reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act—by invoking Section 150 and relying on CBDT Instruction No. 1/2023— is ex-facie without jurisdiction, contrary to binding judicial precedent, and violative of the appellate framework under Sections 250/251 of the Act. 4. It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal, in exercise of its plenary powers under Section

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)

reassessment proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act—by invoking Section 150 and relying on CBDT Instruction No. 1/2023— is ex-facie without jurisdiction, contrary to binding judicial precedent, and violative of the appellate framework under Sections 250/251 of the Act. 4. It is therefore humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Tribunal, in exercise of its plenary powers under Section

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

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

b), (c) or I or s.31 (4). The\nexpression \"directions” In the proviso could only refer to the\ndirections which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or other\ntribunals can issue under the powers conferred on him or them\nunder the respective sections. Therefore, the expression “finding”\nas well as the expression “direction” can be given full meaning,\nnamely, that the finding

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)

120/- by making an addition of Rs. 2,64,66,445/- on account of unexplained investment under section 69 of the Act and same has to be taxed in the hands of the assessee for the year under consideration. There is no dispute that the Assessing Officer proposed to reassess the income on account of transaction of purchase of land

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

b) at any time within four years at the end of that year,\nserve on the assessee, and may pro ceed to assess or reassess such income...!'\nSection 34, conferred jurisdiction on the Income-tax Officer to reo-pen an\nassessment subject to service of notice within the prescribed period. Therefore,\nservice of notice within limitation was the foun dation

SHRI KRISHNARAJ BUILDHOME PVT LTD,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

b) of sub-Section 2 of Section 50C was evidently met. The only question is\nwhether the requirement of clause (a) of sub-Section 2 of Section 50C was\nmet by the assessee.\n8. We have already set out hereinabove the recital appearing in the Deeds of\nConveyance upon which the assessee was relying. Presumably, the case of\nthe assessee

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, AJMER vs. YASHWANT KUMAR SHARMA, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 210/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2020-21 DCIT, Central Circle, Ajmer cuke Vs. Yashwant Kumar Sharma F-108, Industrial Area, Makhupura Parbatpura, Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ASWPS 3791 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent vk;dj vihy la-@C.O. No. 04/JP/2023 (Arising out of ITA Nos. 210/JP/2023) fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2020-21 Yashwant Kumar Sharma

reassessment cannot be declared invalid in the penalty proceedings’’. 25 ITA Nos. 210/JP/2023 & CO No. 04/JP/2023 DCIT, Ajmer vs. Yashwant Kumar Sharma View taken by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the above judgment was indirectly affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, when it dismissed an SLP filed by the Revenue against the judgment in the case

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

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

b), (c) or I or s.31 (4). The\nexpression "directions” In the proviso could only refer to the\ndirections which the Appellate Assistant Commissioner or other\ntribunals can issue under the powers conferred on him or them\nunder the respective sections. Therefore, the expression “finding”\nas well as the expression “direction” can be given full meaning,\nnamely, that the finding

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

SHAILESH GOYAL,TONK vs. ACIT, CENTRE CIRCLE JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in above terms

b) or clause (c), then, notwithstanding anything contained in\nsection 120, it shall be competent for him to exercise the powers under this sub-section in all\ncases where he has reason to believe that any delay in getting the authorisation from\nthe Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or\nCommissioner having jurisdiction over such person

GCK STOCK PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed\nOrder pronounced in the open court on 06/05/2025

section 148 of\nthe Act.\"\n7.3\nAccordingly the assessee strongly contended that the objection raised at\nPaper Book Page No. 182-190 and 120-138 Ought to have been disposed off by the\nJAO/FAO. In the absence of that the reopening initiated u/s.148A(d) was\nuntenable in law.\n8. As regards Ground no. 2 filed by the assessee in this

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

120 OF 2019/11 OF 2022, MARCH 14, 2023) wherein it is held as under :-\r\n\"On a reading of section 80A(5) and section 80AC as they stood prior to 1-4-2018,\r\nit is found that when the latter provision was amended by Finance Act 2018, it\r\nwould reveal that the statutory scheme under

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)

b) lays down in any case to which Explanation 3 applies, means the tax on the total income assessed as reduced by the amount of advance tax, tax deducted at source, tax collected at source and self assessment tax paid before the issue of notice under section 148. However in the present case the return of income was filed

RAGHAV KUMAR DHOOT,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

b)not served upon him in time; or\n(c) served upon him in an improper manner:\nProvided that nothing contained in this section shall apply where the\nassessee has raised such objection before the completion of such\nassessment or reassessment.\nAs per section 292BB of the Act where the notice was not served at all\neven those cases

ARUN PALAWAT,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL),, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

120 are covered under this section. 2(ii)(a) Further, a combined reading of these provisions read with explanation will indicate that this provision covers assessments made by AO u/s 143(3). In these cases, there is application of mind only by one person. Therefore in all these cases power of review been vested with the Commissioner. The assessments

ZARI SILK (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

120 are covered under this section. 2(ii)(a) Further, a combined reading of these provisions read with explanation will indicate that this provision covers assessments made by AO u/s 143(3). In these cases, there is application of mind only by one person. Therefore in all these cases power of review been vested with the Commissioner. The assessments

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

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

4(b) to Sec. what is \"the amount of tax sought to be evaded on which penalty can be imposed and clause (b) lays down in any case to which Explanation 3 applies, means the tax on the total income assessed as reduced by the amount of advance tax, tax deducted at source, tax collected at source and self assessment