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)

4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of 1922 Act, now Section 147) to deal with escaped income. Accordingly, the Apex Court held that

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)

4) of the 1922 Act, analogous to Section 250/254 of the 1961 Act) do not confer on the appellate authority a power to make any direction on matters not arising in the appeal, especially as the Act provides separate mechanisms (like Section 34 of 1922 Act, now Section 147) to deal with escaped income. Accordingly, the Apex Court held that

SDC CONSTRUCTION,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 1(3), JIAPUR

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

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

reassessment proceedings initiated against the assessee under Section 147. Our Submission We submit that reopening u/s 148 of the act is bad in law as no material has been provided for reopening as directed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI Vs Ashish Agarwal as well as the Ld AO has not properly followed the procedure prescribed

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

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

reassessment proceedings under sections 147/48 of the Act. subject to\nfulfilment of the conditions mentioned in sections 147/148, as in such a situation, the\nRevenue cannot be left with no remedy. Therefore, even in case of block assessment\nunder section 153A and in case of unabated/completed assessment and in case no\nincriminating material is found during the search, the power

URMILA RAJENDRA MUNDRA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

In the result grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the Act on 24.03.2025 for Assessment Year 2022-23. The said order of the ld. CIT(A) arise as against the penalty order dated 26.09.2024 passed under section 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act] by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (2), Ajmer. 2 Urmila Rajendra Mundra vs. ITO 2. In this appeal

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

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

reassessment proceedings under sections 147/48 of the Act. subject to\nfulfilment of the conditions mentioned in sections 147/148, as in such a situation, the\nRevenue cannot be left with no remedy. Therefore, even in case of block assessment\nunder section 153A and in case of unabated/completed assessment and in case no\nincriminating material is found during the search, the power

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. TRILOK DEWAN, SIKAR

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

reassessment proceedings under sections 147/48 of the Act. subject to\nfulfilment of the conditions mentioned in sections 147/148, as in such a situation, the\nRevenue cannot be left with no remedy. Therefore, even in case of block assessment\nunder section 153A and in case of unabated/completed assessment and in case no\nincriminating material is found during the search, the power

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)

4) was introduced into section 34 were considered. This court indicated, keeping the provisions of section 34 in view, that there was really no distinction between 'issue' and 'service of notice'. Section 34, sub-section (1) as far as relevant provided thus: Sh. Hari Prakash Gupta vs. ITO '34. (1) If- (b) he may in cases falling under clause

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. VIJAY KUMAR SAINI, AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2020-21. The revenue has raised the following grounds :- 1. The learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in granting relief to the assessee. 2. The learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law in holding that penalty in the case of tax payer was leviable not under

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)

250 of the IT Act for the assessment year 2008-09. The revenue has raised the following grounds :- 1. The ld. CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts (independently & severally) in granting relief to the assessee. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT (A), has erred in quashing the re-assessment

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 deserves to be quashed. The order of the Learned CIT(A) also deserved to be quashed on this ground. Additional Ground No.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. SUPREME POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the results the appeal of the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

reassessment under Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 8 153. ………………….. 30. The argument that by enactment of Section 153A to 153D has not eclipsed Section 148 does not enhance the case of respondent to initiate the proceedings under Section 148. On fulfillment of two conditions for invoking Section 153C the proceeding in accordance with Section 153A are to be initiated

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

4. The impugned order relied upon the following extract of Karnataka High Court's decision in CIT v. Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory[2013] 359 ITR 565/218 Taxman 423/35 taxmann.com 250 to delete the penalty:— "The Assessing Officer is empowered under the Act to initiate penalty proceedings once he is satisfied in the course of any proceedings that there is concealment

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.”

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. That in law and facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. Assessing officer grossly erred in passing the ex-parte assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act. 2 Late Shri Jitendra Nagar through

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

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

250/-, Hence, there is no additional\nincome disclosed by the assessee in the Return of Income filed u/s 153A of\nthe Act.\nThereafter notice u/s 143(2) of Act was issued on 25-06-2021 which\nwas duly served. Further notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. PRIYA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

250/-. Hence, there is no additional\nincome disclosed by the assessee in the Return of Income filed u/s 153A of\nthe Act.\nThereafter notice u/s 143(2) of Act was issued on 25-06-2021 which\nwas duly served. Further notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called

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

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

250/-. Hence, there is no additional\nincome disclosed by the assessee in the Return of Income filed u/s 153A of\nthe Act.\nThereafter notice u/s 143(2) of Act was issued on 25-06-2021 which\nwas duly served. Further notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called

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

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

250/-. Hence, there is no additional\nincome disclosed by the assessee in the Return of Income filed u/s 153A of\nthe Act.\nThereafter notice u/s 143(2) of Act was issued on 25-06-2021 which\nwas duly served. Further notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called