DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

reassess the assessee HUF and completed the re-assessment by adding Rs. 4,15,32,446/- as substantive addition in the hands of Madan Mohan Gupta as per section 292C of the Act as the papers were found from the premises of Madan Mohan Gupta and primary onus lies with him to explain these entries. However, a protective addition

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)

154 (Bom)held that “The basic postulate which underlines section 147 is the formation of the belief by the Assessing Officer that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year. The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that such is the case before he proceeds to issue a notice under section 147. The reasons which

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)

3), Kolkata that they are Directors in the various companies which is controlled & managed by Mr. Anjani Banka. Statement of Mr. Anjani Banka was also recorded by the DDIT(Inv.), Unit-2(3), Kolkata on 29.03.2014 wherein he accepted that he is engaged in providing accommodation entries in form of share capital, unsecured loan, LTCG etc and to facilitate

RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORP. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue

3) in respect of the alleged mistake in granting deduction under Section 80 IB, for income tax and wealth tax debited in the profit and loss account and the share issue expenses and FRN issue expenses written off to be disallowed, being capital in nature. 29. A reading of the notice under Section 154 of the Act and the reassessment

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORTATION LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue

3) in respect of the alleged mistake in granting deduction under Section 80 IB, for income tax and wealth tax debited in the profit and loss account and the share issue expenses and FRN issue expenses written off to be disallowed, being capital in nature. 29. A reading of the notice under Section 154 of the Act and the reassessment

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

154, 155 & 156/Ahd/2012. (c) Ratan Kumar Sharma vs. DCIT ITA 797 & 798/Jaipur/2014. (d) Vikram Gupta vs/ DCIT ITA 174/Jaipur/2017 etc/ (e) Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturer PL vs. ACIT (686/Jaipur/2014) (xvii) Thus the essential corollary of these decisions and also the decision relied upon by the appellant is that no addition can be made in the proceedings under section 153A in respect

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

154 dated 21/11/2017 1.3) Opinion during issuance of notice u/s 148 and reassessment proceedings u/s 147 Submissions on the above headings is as detailed below, for your consideration, with utmost regards your honour(s): 1.1) Formation of opinion while passing order u/s 143(3): The ld.AO has made the extract of his own show cause notice a part

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S BARAN ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD., KOTA

154 ITR 244 (Pat) and others as referred by the Appellant, I am of the considered view that Appellant duly discharged its burden casted upon it u/s 68 of the Act. It is further seen that M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd and M/s Teac Consultants Private Limited duly replied to the notices issued by DCIT/DDIT(Inv.), Kolkata in respect

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S BARAN ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD., KOTA

154 ITR 244 (Pat) and others as referred by the Appellant, I am of the considered view that Appellant duly discharged its burden casted upon it u/s 68 of the Act. It is further seen that M/s Sangam Distributors Pvt. Ltd and M/s Teac Consultants Private Limited duly replied to the notices issued by DCIT/DDIT(Inv.), Kolkata in respect

SYLVAN GREENS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment and without giving the deduction under section 80IC, are not according to the law and facts of the case. The assessee would like to submit as under: a) The assessee's plant is situated at Khasra No 4,5 & 58, Mauza Kulhariwala PO Barotiwala Tehsil, Baddi District Solan (HP) 174103 which is backward area and the assessee is also

ADITYA CEMENT,BEHROR vs. ITO, BEHROR

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

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

section 154 can be invoked by any authority only to rectify any mistake apparent from record, which should be manifest and glaring from the order passed by the A.O. Any issue, which is debatable, carries more than one opinion and has been subject matter of litigation cannot be termed to be a mistake apparent from record. In the instant case

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

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 material existing or brought on the record

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

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 material existing or brought on the record

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

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 material existing or brought on the record

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

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 material existing or brought on the record

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

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 material existing or brought on the record

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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 Smt. Jaya Prem Bhatia, Kota. findings of the search and any other material existing or brought

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

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 Smt. Jaya Prem Bhatia, Kota. findings of the search and any other material existing or brought

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S ORIENTAL POWER CABLES LTD., 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