M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

reassessment resulting into the demand or proceedings of penalty." (Emphasis supplied) The said judgment which essentially deals with second proviso to Section 153A of the Act also supports the conclusion, which we have reached hereinbefore. 28. It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 that

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S KOTA DALL MILL, KOTA

reassessment resulting into the demand or proceedings of penalty." (Emphasis supplied) The said judgment which essentially deals with second proviso to Section 153A of the Act also supports the conclusion, which we have reached hereinbefore. 28. It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 that

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

reassessment resulting into the demand or proceedings of penalty." (Emphasis supplied) The said judgment which essentially deals with second proviso to Section 153A of the Act also supports the conclusion, which we have reached hereinbefore. 28. It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 that

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

reassessment resulting into the demand or proceedings of penalty." (Emphasis supplied) The said judgment which essentially deals with second proviso to Section 153A of the Act also supports the conclusion, which we have reached hereinbefore. 28. It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 that

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

section 153A of the Act. Thus the said judgment is inapplicable under the facts of the present case. Another judgment cited by ld. D/R is in the case of Harshvardhan Johari vs. DCIT (2020) 118 taxmann.com 449 (Jaipur-Trib) wherein it was held that the notice under section 143(2) of the Act was not issued though the time

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

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

reassessment proceedings\nunder Section 147/148, invoking Section 150 and relying on CBDT Instruction No.\n1/2023, exceeding his statutory appellate jurisdiction under Sections 250/251 of the Act\nand accordingly, these directions are legally non-est and ought to be expunged/\nquashed.\n\n2. SUBMISSIONS:\n\n2.1.\nThe entire submissions, set out infra, based on the legal and procedural arguments, are\nurged

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)

section 148, and its object would be defeated if such notices are issued by Jurisdictional Assessing Officer. 14 Sh. Kapil Taneja vs. DCIT Mettler Toledo India (P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2024] 165 taxmann.com 541 (Bombay) Held: Where reassessment

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

14,285/- is covered by the additional interest income offered by the assessee to tax for the assessment years 2015-16 and 16-17. Hence the same is deleted. Ground No. 2 is regarding addition made on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act while passing the assessment order under section 153A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

14,285/- is covered by the additional interest income offered by the assessee to tax for the assessment years 2015-16 and 16-17. Hence the same is deleted. Ground No. 2 is regarding addition made on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act while passing the assessment order under section 153A

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

14,285/- is covered by the additional interest income offered by the assessee to tax for the assessment years 2015-16 and 16-17. Hence the same is deleted. Ground No. 2 is regarding addition made on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act while passing the assessment order under section 153A

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

14,285/- is covered by the additional interest income offered by the assessee to tax for the assessment years 2015-16 and 16-17. Hence the same is deleted. Ground No. 2 is regarding addition made on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act while passing the assessment order under section 153A

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

14,285/- is covered by the additional interest income offered by the assessee to tax for the assessment years 2015-16 and 16-17. Hence the same is deleted. Ground No. 2 is regarding addition made on account of deemed dividend under section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act while passing the assessment order under section 153A

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)

Section 150(1) requires that the appellate or revisional authority explicitly directs reassessment of a particular income or issue. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajinder Nath v. CIT [(1979) 120 ITR 14

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)

Section 150(1) requires that the appellate or revisional authority explicitly directs reassessment of a particular income or issue. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajinder Nath v. CIT [(1979) 120 ITR 14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SHRI RAJLAXMI DENIM, BHILWARA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

Section 153A, however, the Assessing Officer has been given the power to assess or reassess the 'total income' of the six assessment years in ITA 1134/JP/2018_ 14

POOJASHISH INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassess' to completed assessment proceedings. vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other 14

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)

reassess the total income taking note of the undisclosed income, if any, found during the course of search. For this purpose, the restrictions imposed on the Assessing Officer by way of sections 148 to 153 to reopen the assessment u/s 147 has been removed by the non abstante clause used in section 153A. 14

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

reassessment can be made. Thus the ld. A/R has submitted that the AO has made the additions in the assessment under section 153A whereby the completed assessments have been disturbed without even referring to any incriminating material found or seized during the course of search and seizure under section 132 of the Act. The only basis of addition