GIRIRAJKRIPA DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

2) of the Act stipulates that no order of re-assessment can be passed beyond the period of one year from the expiry of the financial year in which service of the notice was effected. Section 148 (1), however, is clear that no reassessment can take place without service of notice being effected on the Assessee or his authorised representative

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

The appeal stands allowed

2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.' The High Court relied upon the decision of this court in the case of Banarsi Debi ν. ΙΤΟ [1964] 53 ITR 100 (SC) where the validity of a notice under section 34(1) of the Indian Income

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)

2) The provisions of sub-section (1) as to the issue of notice shall be subject to the provisions of section 151.' The High Court relied upon the decision of this court in the case of Banarsi Debi v. ΙΤΟ [1964] 53 ITR 100 (SC) where the validity of a notice under section 34(1) of the Indian Income

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 under Section 147, 148 & 148A of the Act in a faceless manner. Proceedings under Section 147 and Section 148 of the Act would now have to be taken as per the 34 ITA No. 656/JP/2023 & CO No. 06/JP/2023 ITO vs. Mukesh Kumar Soni procedure legislated by the Parliament in respect of reopening/ re-assessment i.e., proceedings under Section 148A

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

j[krs gq, crk;k pkgrk gwa fd eSaus eSllZ nhiukjk;.k O;kikj izk-fy- dks p fn;k Fkk ftldk eq>s bl lky esa dS'k izkIr gks x;k ftls eSaus bl foRr o"kZ dh v?kksf"kr vk; ds :i esa foHkkx dks lefiZr dj fn;kA^^ d`i;k ryk'kh ,oa tCrh

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

j[krs gq, crk;k pkgrk gwa fd eSaus eSllZ nhiukjk;.k O;kikj izk-fy- dks p fn;k Fkk ftldk eq>s bl lky esa dS'k izkIr gks x;k ftls eSaus bl foRr o"kZ dh v?kksf"kr vk; ds :i esa foHkkx dks lefiZr dj fn;kA^^ d`i;k ryk'kh ,oa tCrh

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

j[krs gq, crk;k pkgrk gwa fd eSaus eSllZ nhiukjk;.k O;kikj izk-fy- dks p fn;k Fkk ftldk eq>s bl lky esa dS'k izkIr gks x;k ftls eSaus bl foRr o"kZ dh v?kksf"kr vk; ds :i esa foHkkx dks lefiZr dj fn;kA^^ d`i;k ryk'kh ,oa tCrh

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

j[krs gq, crk;k pkgrk gwa fd eSaus eSllZ nhiukjk;.k O;kikj izk-fy- dks p fn;k Fkk ftldk eq>s bl lky esa dS'k izkIr gks x;k ftls eSaus bl foRr o"kZ dh v?kksf"kr vk; ds :i esa foHkkx dks lefiZr dj fn;kA^^ d`i;k ryk'kh ,oa tCrh

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

j[krs gq, crk;k pkgrk gwa fd eSaus eSllZ nhiukjk;.k O;kikj izk-fy- dks p fn;k Fkk ftldk eq>s bl lky esa dS'k izkIr gks x;k ftls eSaus bl foRr o"kZ dh v?kksf"kr vk; ds :i esa foHkkx dks lefiZr dj fn;kA^^ d`i;k ryk'kh ,oa tCrh

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF),JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CENTRAL CIRCLE

reassessment, if any, for such assessment year has been \nmade.\nThese amendments have been brought into effect retrospectively from 1st June, \n2003.\"\n(emphasis supplied)\nAs per the CBDT Gircular also, in case of section 163C of the Act, assessments \nof the preceding six years as pending on the date on which books of account or \ndocuments or assets seized

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

27. Section 153A and 153C starts with non-obstante clause. The procedure for assessment/reassessment in Section 153A, 153C in cases of search or requisition has an overriding effect to the regular provisions for assessment or 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

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

27. The Allahabad High Court in Smt. Shaila Agarwal's (supra) has held as under:— "19. The second proviso to Section 153A of the Act, refers to abatement of the pending assessment or re-assessment proceedings. The word 'pending' does not operate any such interpretation, that wherever the appeal against such assessment or reassessment is pending, the same along with

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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent ITA Nos. 1024 to 1026, 1100 to 1104 & 1230/JP/2018 & 4 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17/01/2019 mn?kks"k.kk

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent ITA Nos. 1024 to 1026, 1100 to 1104 & 1230/JP/2018 & 4 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17/01/2019 mn?kks"k.kk

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent ITA Nos. 1024 to 1026, 1100 to 1104 & 1230/JP/2018 & 4 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17/01/2019 mn?kks"k.kk

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent ITA Nos. 1024 to 1026, 1100 to 1104 & 1230/JP/2018 & 4 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17/01/2019 mn?kks"k.kk

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent ITA Nos. 1024 to 1026, 1100 to 1104 & 1230/JP/2018 & 4 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Vijay Goyal (CA) & Shri Gulshan Agarwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT-DR) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 17/01/2019 mn?kks"k.kk