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

GEMCO INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed with no order as to cost

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

160 held that:- “119….. A… B…. C. Section 153C, on the other hand, pertains to the non-searched entity and in respect of whom any material, books of accounts or documents may have been seized and were found to or pertain to a peson other than the searched person. As in the case of section 153A, section 153C was also

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

160/- (8,33,320 +79,840) and silver coins of different weights of 10 grams, 20 grams & 50 grams is of Rs.1,55,975/-. The gold jewellery is purchased out of TP dala income of Rs.23,41,289/- offered for tax in case galaxy Industries in FY 2017-18 and silver coins was purchased out of such income for distribution

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

160/- (8,33,320 +79,840) and silver coins of different weights of 10 grams, 20 grams & 50 grams is of Rs.1,55,975/-. The gold jewellery is purchased out of TP dala income of Rs.23,41,289/- offered for tax in case galaxy Industries in FY 2017-18 and silver coins was purchased out of such income for distribution

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आंकड़ुठरधारी आइटीएए सं.र@ITA Nos.493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 Mahendra Kumar Goyal चुके Vs. ACIT/DCIT Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Central Circle-03, Jaipur लेखा संख्याल्लेय सं.जीआइआर सं.पान@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G अपीलार्थी@Appellant प्रत्यार्थी@Respondent निर्धारीती की आर से@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की आर से@ R

160/- (8,33,320 +79,840) and silver coins of different weights of 10 grams, 20 grams & 50 grams is of Rs.1,55,975/-. The gold jewellery is purchased out of TP dala income of Rs.23,41,289/- offered for tax in case galaxy Industries in FY 2017-18 and silver coins was purchased out of such income for distribution

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

160/- (8,33,320 +79,840) and silver coins of different weights of 10 grams, 20 grams & 50 grams is of Rs.1,55,975/-. The gold jewellery is purchased out of TP dala income of Rs.23,41,289/- offered for tax in case galaxy Industries in FY 2017-18 and silver coins was purchased out of such income for distribution

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

reassess\ncannot sustain.\"\n\n4.\nHon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Excel Commodity and\nDerivative Pvt. Ltd vide appeal no. APOT/132/2022 & IA No.GA/1/2022 dated\n29.08.2022 held as under:\n\n“.......the information has been lightly used which resulted in issuance of notice.\nAs pointed out earlier, the assessee had submitted the explanation to the notice

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-5, JAIPUR vs. SHRI BANWARI LAL SHARMA, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

reassessment.] 21. It was submitted that section 292BB is an exclusive definition and specifically provides that a notice shall be deemed to be served in a situation that assessee has cooperated/ attended / participated in assessment/ re assessment proceedings and no objection regarding non receipt of notice was filed during assessment stage. In other words, section 292BB cures only procedural infirmities

SHRI BANWARI LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-5, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee and Revenue are disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

reassessment.] 21. It was submitted that section 292BB is an exclusive definition and specifically provides that a notice shall be deemed to be served in a situation that assessee has cooperated/ attended / participated in assessment/ re assessment proceedings and no objection regarding non receipt of notice was filed during assessment stage. In other words, section 292BB cures only procedural infirmities

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassess the total income of six assessment years. Once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any undisclosed income found during search or/and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return or which is not unearthed during the search, in order to find out what

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

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

reassess the total income of six assessment years. Once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any undisclosed income found during search or/and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return or which is not unearthed during the search, in order to find out what

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

reassess the total income of six assessment years. Once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any undisclosed income found during search or/and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return or which is not unearthed during the search, in order to find out what

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

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

reassess the total income of six assessment years. Once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any undisclosed income found during search or/and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return or which is not unearthed during the search, in order to find out what

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassess the total income of six assessment years. Once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any undisclosed income found during search or/and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return or which is not unearthed during the search, in order to find out what

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

reassess the total income of six assessment years. Once the assessment is reopened, the assessing authority can take note of the income disclosed in the earlier return, any undisclosed income found during search or/and also any other income which is not disclosed in the earlier return or which is not unearthed during the search, in order to find out what

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR vs. GORDHAN DAS MAHESHWARI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed as indicated hereinabove

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

160/- considering the undisclosed cash loans of Rs 5,00,00,000/-, interest earned of Rs. 4,88,000/- on these loans and unexplained funds of Rs. 4,80,30,205/- 4.2.4 During the course of appellate proceedings the appellant has objected the Validity of notice issued u/s148 of the 1.T.Act, 1961 and the order passed

MAYA KUMARI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment\norder passed by Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 is bad in\nlaw-Assessee's grounds allowed.\nUnder the same facts and circumstances this Honble ITAT in the case of PradeepKuamr\nv/s ITO Ward-2, Jhujhunu in ITA No. 370/Jp/2022_dt.11.01.2023 has quashed the\nassessment.\n2. Notice not served upon the assessee:In this regard

PRABHATI DEVI,DAUSA vs. ITO WARD DAUSA , DAUSA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 148 a valid service of the notice is pre-condition. Reference is\nmade to judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Shri Chetan Gupta vs. ACIT\n(2014) 160 TTJ 09 (Del.). For valid assumption of jurisdiction to frame a reassessment

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

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

160-165)\nrespectively at their address as mentioned in ITRs. A perusal of the\nassessment orders will reveal that during the course of assessment\nproceedings Notice u/s 143(2) as well as notice u/s 142(1) were issued and\nserved, thus the physical identity and physical existence of these companies\nat the given address is evident. A perusal