RAJ KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

viii) Vimal Chand Surana ITA No. 304/JP/2018. (ix) RajendraKumar Jain dated 14.09.20. 4. On the other hand, the ld. D/R relied on the order of the AO. He submitted that the penalty was rightly levied on account of unexplained cash, unexplained jewellery and unexplained valuables found at the premises of the assessee. It was submitted by the ld. D/R that

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.”

VIII of the Finance Act, 2016 (28 of 2016) (hereinafter referred to as the Finance Act) and the completion of any action, referred to in clause (a) of subsection (1) of section 3 of the said Act, relates to sending an intimation under sub-section (1) of section 168 of the Finance Act, and the time limit for completion

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

36 Taxmann.com 523. In the said case, the facts were that A search under Section 132(1) of the Act was conducted at various business premises of Suncity Alloys Group of Companies, Jodhpur, to which, the appellant firm belong and at the residence of directors/partners of various firms/companies on 20.02.2004. Several incriminating documents were recovered from the residential premises

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

36 Taxmann.com 523. In the said case, the facts were that A search under Section 132(1) of the Act was conducted at various business premises of Suncity Alloys Group of Companies, Jodhpur, to which, the appellant firm belong and at the residence of directors/partners of various firms/companies on 20.02.2004. Several incriminating documents were recovered from the residential premises

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

36 Taxmann.com 523. In the said case, the facts were that A search under Section 132(1) of the Act was conducted at various business premises of Suncity Alloys Group of Companies, Jodhpur, to which, the appellant firm belong and at the residence of directors/partners of various firms/companies on 20.02.2004. Several incriminating documents were recovered from the residential premises

MRS. RENU SEHGAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed and that of the

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 837/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Acit Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs. Central Circle-3 27, Onkar Nagar, Civil Lines Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 708 & 709 Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Cuke Mrs. Renu Sehgal The Dcit Vs. 227-278, Nemisagar Colony Central Circle-3, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Varinder Mehta, Cit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 19/08/2019 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm There Are Cross Appeals For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Directed Against The Order Dated 09-04-2013 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur. The 2 Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs Dcit, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

reassessment proceedings. The Supreme Court held that the circular by itself without any other material and investigation, could not afford any basis to the ITO for forming a reasonable belief that the appellant had not made a full and true disclosure of the relevant facts on which account the income of the appellant chargeable to tax had escaped 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

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

reassess the income of the assessee depending upon the undisclosed income detected during the course of search and seizure. Therefore, the completed assessment can be disturbed by the Assessing Officer while making the assessment under section 153A only if there is incriminating material found during the search disclosing undisclosed income of the assessee. Otherwise the income as declared

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

reassess the income of the assessee depending upon the undisclosed income detected during the course of search and seizure. Therefore, the completed assessment can be disturbed by the Assessing Officer while making the assessment under section 153A only if there is incriminating material found during the search disclosing undisclosed income of the assessee. Otherwise the income as declared

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

reassess the income of the assessee depending upon the undisclosed income detected during the course of search and seizure. Therefore, the completed assessment can be disturbed by the Assessing Officer while making the assessment under section 153A only if there is incriminating material found during the search disclosing undisclosed income of the assessee. Otherwise the income as declared

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

reassess the income of the assessee depending upon the undisclosed income detected during the course of search and seizure. Therefore, the completed assessment can be disturbed by the Assessing Officer while making the assessment under section 153A only if there is incriminating material found during the search disclosing undisclosed income of the assessee. Otherwise the income as declared

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

reassess the income of the assessee depending upon the undisclosed income detected during the course of search and seizure. Therefore, the completed assessment can be disturbed by the Assessing Officer while making the assessment under section 153A only if there is incriminating material found during the search disclosing undisclosed income of the assessee. Otherwise the income as declared

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 the income of the assessee depending upon the undisclosed income detected during the course of search and seizure. Therefore, the completed assessment can be disturbed by the AO while making the assessment under section 153A only if there is incriminating material found during the search disclosing undisclosed income of the assessee. Otherwise the income as declared by the assessee

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 the income of the assessee depending upon the undisclosed income detected during the course of search and seizure. Therefore, the completed assessment can be disturbed by the AO while making the assessment under section 153A only if there is incriminating material found during the search disclosing undisclosed income of the assessee. Otherwise the income as declared by the assessee

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

36 taxmann.com 523/219 Taxman 223. The said part of the decision in Kabul Chawla (supra) in paras 33 and 34 reads as under: '33. The decision of the Rajasthan High Court in Jai Steel (India), Jodhpur v. ACIT (supra) involved a case where certain books of accounts and other documents that had not been produced in the course of original

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

reassessment was just and proper - Held, yes\n[Para 2] [In favour of revenue]\"\nHon'ble High Court Of Kerala in the case of Kerala Financial Corporation v.\nJoint Commissioner of Income-tax [2009] 308 ITR 434 (Kerala)/[2009] 221 CTR\n613 (Kerala) [19-12-2007] held that, admittedly, the assessee was not entitled to\nclaim deduction under section 36

SHRI BANNA LAL JAT,BHILWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, theses appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

section 153A(1)(a). Considering the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala (supra), the issue relating to exempted long term capital gain is Shri Banna Lal Jat vs. ACIT considered while finalizing assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act. As the assessee has himself surrender the claim of exemption

SHRI BANNA LAL JAT,BHILWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, theses appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

section 153A(1)(a). Considering the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala (supra), the issue relating to exempted long term capital gain is Shri Banna Lal Jat vs. ACIT considered while finalizing assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the Act. As the assessee has himself surrender the claim of exemption