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

reassessment of the income for these six years. The ld. D/R has pointed out that in a case where the assessee has not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Act for the relevant assessment year and no assessment order is passed under section 144

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

reassessment of the income for these six years. The ld. D/R has pointed out that in a case where the assessee has not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Act for the relevant assessment year and no assessment order is passed under section 144

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

reassessment of the income for these six years. The ld. D/R has pointed out that in a case where the assessee has not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Act for the relevant assessment year and no assessment order is passed under section 144

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

reassessment of the income for these six years. The ld. D/R has pointed out that in a case where the assessee has not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Act for the relevant assessment year and no assessment order is passed under section 144

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

reassessment of the income for these six years. The ld. D/R has pointed out that in a case where the assessee has not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Act for the relevant assessment year and no assessment order is passed under section 144

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

reassessment of the income for these six years. The ld. D/R has pointed out that in a case where the assessee has not filed any return of income under section 139 of the Act for the relevant assessment year and no assessment order is passed under section 144

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 144 (i.e. only limited to Best Judgment Assessments). 2.6.v. Beyond these clearly delineated boundaries, the CIT(A) has no authority whatsoever to issue any direction or remand any matter, including instructions for initiation of reassessment

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 144 (i.e. only limited to Best Judgment Assessments). 2.6.v. Beyond these clearly delineated boundaries, the CIT(A) has no authority whatsoever to issue any direction or remand any matter, including instructions for initiation of reassessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

reassessment under Sections 139,147,148,149,151 & 153. " In view of the above discussion, the assessment completed u/s 144

LATE SHRI JITENDRA NAGAR THROUGH HIS L/R SMT. DEEPIKA NAGAR,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD BARAN, BARAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

section 151(new regime). Consequently, the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 24.03.2023, stands quashed. 3.5 Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of ACIT v. Surya Ferrous Alloys Pvt. Ltd. [2025] 1 TMI 326 after considering the aforesaidjudgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra) has held: Validity of reassessment

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

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

Section 144\n(i.e. only limited to Best Judgment Assessments).\n2.6.v. Beyond these clearly delineated boundaries, the CIT(A) has no authority\nwhatsoever to issue any direction or remand any matter, including instructions\nfor initiation of reassessment

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

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

reassessment under section 144 of the 1961 Act. On appeal the High Court found that none of the partners of the assessee

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 relating to any assessment year which has abated under the second proviso to sub-section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: 3 Thus, in view of the above, it is submitted that if no scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3144 of the Act was made earlier

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 relating to any assessment year which has abated under the second proviso to sub-section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: 3 Thus, in view of the above, it is submitted that if no scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3144 of the Act was made earlier

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 relating to any assessment year which has abated under the second proviso to sub-section (1), shall stand revived with effect from the date of receipt of the order of such annulment by the Commissioner: 3 Thus, in view of the above, it is submitted that if no scrutiny assessment u/s 143(3144 of the Act was made earlier

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

reassessment or recomputation under sub-section (3) of section 143 or under section 144 or under section 147, as the case

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

144 r.w.s 144B of the Income 2 RSD Containers Pvt Ltd. vs ITO Tax Act, 1961 [ for short “Act”] which was passed by the Assessment Unit of Income Tax Department [ for short AO]. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. That the whole proceedings u/s 147/148 are liable to be held as null and void

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

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

144, he may set aside the assessment and refer\nthe case back to the Assessing Officer for making a fresh\nassessment;]\n(aa) in an appeal against the order of assessment in respect of which the\nproceeding before the Settlement Commission abates under section\n245HA, he may, after taking into consideration all the material and\nother information produced