INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

reassessment proceedings, the AO vide order dt.\n25.11.2019 disposing the objections raised, stating that the assessment u/s 143(3)\nof the Act is completed on 28.03.2016 and notice issued on 18.03.2019 which is\nwithin four years from the end of the relevant year in which assessment is\ncompleted. Therefore, the AO wrongly has changed the time limit from 'four years

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

section 147 the AO, assesses or reassesses\nany income chargeable to tax, which has escaped assessment for any assessment year,\nwith respect to which he had \"reason to believe\" to be so, then only, in addition, he can\nalso put to tax, the other income, chargeable to tax, which has escaped assessment and\nwhich has come to his notice subsequently

ACIT, NCR BUILDING, JAIPUR vs. HANS RAJ AGARWAL, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR JAIPUR

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

reassessment can only be done on the basis of new material and in the present case there is no new material to which a reference is to be found. 4.10 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd. reported in 320 ITR 561 (SC) had held that one needs to give a schematic

BABU LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

239 registered documents seized by the Income Tax Department during the course of search on Shri Raju Sharma. During the course of appellant proceedings, the appellant submitted confirmation letters and affidavits of the persons from whom the assessee borrowed the said amounts by account payee cheques/inter banking transfer. The said documents explained the sources of deposits made by the said

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

section even though said issue did not find mention in the reasons\r\nrecorded and the notice issued under s.148. Since there was confusion\r\nprevailing with regard to the powers of the AO to assess or reassess on the\r\nissues for which no reasons were recorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as\r\nclarificatory. Now, after

BABU LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

239 registered documents\nseized by the Income Tax Department during the course of search on Shri Raju\nSharma. During the course of appellant proceedings, the appellant submitted\nconfirmation letters and affidavits of the persons from whom the assessee borrowed the\nsaid amounts by account payee cheques/inter banking transfer. The said documents\nexplained the sources of deposits made by the said

MO. SHARIPH KURESHI,SIKAR vs. ITO WARD-4 SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section even though said issue did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice issued under s. 148. Since there was confusion prevailing with regard to the powers of the AO to assess or reassess on the issues for which no reasons were recorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as 7 Mo. Shariph Kureshi, Sikar. clarificatory

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section even though said issue did not find mention in the reasons\nrecorded and the notice issued under s.148. Since there was confusion prevailing with\nregard to the powers of the AO to assess or reassess on the issues for which no reasons\nwere recorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as clarificatory. Now, after the insertion\nofExpln

RAJASTHAN ADVANCE JOINT CARE TRUST,JAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

section 239 and also on the ground that reassessment proceedings are for the benefit of the department. 2 Rajasthan Advance

NARESH KUMAR BHARGAVA,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

reassessment 20-27 8. proceedings, for the relevant previous year. S. No. Particulars Page No. Income Tax Return Form, of the assessee, for the relevant 28-37 9. previous year. Ledger of the assessee in the books of Broker, for the period 38-39 10. under consideration. Bank Statement of assessee, for the relevant previous year. 40-42 11. Copy

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

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

Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment of any other person (Validity of) - Assessment year 2007- 08 - In appellate proceedings, Tribunal recorded a finding that satisfaction for initiation of proceedings under section 153C was recorded by Assessing officer on 02-02-2015 - Tribunal thus opined that Assessing Officer could not have initiated and passed

RADHAKISHAN BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment into two stages and when viewed in that light allocation. The distribution of functions between the JAO and NFAC is complimentary and concurrent as contemplated under the various schemes and the statutory provisions. This balanced distribution underscores the legislative intent to create a seamless integration of traditional and faceless assessment mechanisms within a unified statutory framework This

RADHAKISHNA BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment into two stages and when viewed in that light allocation. The distribution of functions between the JAO and NFAC is complimentary and concurrent as contemplated under the various schemes and the statutory provisions. This balanced distribution underscores the legislative intent to create a seamless integration of traditional and faceless assessment mechanisms within a unified statutory framework This

PRADEEP KUMAR,JHUJHUNU vs. ITO WARD -2, JHUJHUNU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

section even though said issue did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice issued under s. 148. Since there was confusion prevailing with regard to the powers of the AO to assess or reassess on the issues for which no reasons were recorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as clarificatory. Now, after the insertion of Expln

RAMA SHANKER PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section even\nthough said issue did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice\nissued under s.148. Since there was confusion prevailing with regard to the\npowers of the AO to assess or reassess on the issues for which no reasons were\nrecorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as clarificatory. Now, after the insertion\nofExpln

JHUNJHUNBALAJI MOTORS PVT.LTD.,JHUNJHUNU vs. ACIT CIRCLE-JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU

239\n(SC)), Justice J Subba Rao, observed. \"The limits of the power are implicit in\nthe expression "best of his judgment Judgment is a faculty to decide matters\nwith wisdom truly and legally, but on settled on invariable principles of justice.\nThough there is an element of guess work in a best judgment assessment, it\nshall be a wild

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 59/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Vijay Kumar Agarwal, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. 7/58, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Ward 4(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Advpa 6150 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Pravin Kr. Saraswat (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/05/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 27/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Learned C.I.T. (A) Has Erred For Not Considering The Issue For Validity Of Issue Notice U/S 148 Of I.T. Act, 1961, While There Was No Escapement Of Income On Part Of Assessee. The Initiation Of Proceedings Was Only On Behest Of I.T.O. Ward 3(2), Who Has Intimated To A.O. For Advancement Of Loan Rs.53,95,000/- Given By Assessee To Pooja Agarwal, While Concern A.O. Has Accepted Said Loan In Her Hands After Detailed Examination. Hence Initiation Of 2

239 (SC)]. 1.2.4 Heart of the Section 147 is the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer that income has escaped assessment. The reasons so recorded have to be based on some tangible material and that should be evident from reading the reasons. This is the bare minimum mandatory requirement of the first part of Section

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

section even though said issue did not find mention in the reasons recorded\nand the notice issued under s.148. Since there was confusion prevailing with\nregard to the powers of the AO to assess or reassess on the issues for which no\nreasons were recorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as clarificatory. Now, after\nthe insertion of Expln