SHRI SHRAVAN CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

reassessment order. 9. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that though the return might have been filed with Circle-2, Jaipur, however the processing under section 143(1) has been done by Circle-5, Jaipur and, therefore, the jurisdiction of AO Circle-5, Jaipur is based on the address shown in the PAN of the assessee

DESH RAJ JAKHAR,GORDHANPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NEEM KA THANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

reassessment proceedings, ensuring a fair and lawful exercise of power. The satisfaction recorded in the present case justifies the issuance of notice under Section 148. 1) The appellant's reliance on the time availability under Section 143(2) is, therefore, not legally sustainable as the provisions operate independently and cater to different situations. The Hon'ble Courts have upheld

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF), JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

39,64,509\n26,79,94,750\n5,11,79,000\n56,31,38,249\nBased on this calculation again the assessee was asked to show cause as\nto why the aforementioned addition should not be made in his hand. The\nassessee submitted his reply which was considered by the ld. AO but was\nnot found tenable. Ld. AO also

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)

reassessment as prescribed in sub section (2) of section 150, limitation provided u/s 149 has to be counted from the end of relevant assessment year till date of order which is subject matter of appeal wherein directions were passed. It is also submitted that the order(s) of Ld. CIT (A) – IV, Jaipur in which direction for re-opening

LATE SH. BIRDI CHAND THROUGH LEGAL HEIR MUKESH SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

39 (Guj.), wherein the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued to the assessee long after he had passed away. The heir of the deceased informed the Assessing Officer that the assessee has passed away and, therefore, the notice under section 148 of the Act is invalid, despite which the heir was told to file the return

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassess the income of the Respondent pursuant to such return." On the facts of that case it was held that the Revenue had sufficiently discharged the onus by producing the affidavit of the process server. 35. Under Section 282 (1) of the Act, service of notice may be made by delivering or transmitting a copy thereof to the person

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

2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year under consideration were not pending on the date of search. In search, no incriminating material indicating any undisclosed income for the year under consideration was found. Section 153A empowers the AO to issue notice

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

2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year under consideration were not pending on the date of search. In search, no incriminating material indicating any undisclosed income for the year under consideration was found. Section 153A empowers the AO to issue notice

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

2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year under consideration were not pending on the date of search. In search, no incriminating material indicating any undisclosed income for the year under consideration was found. Section 153A empowers the AO to issue notice

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

2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year under consideration were not pending on the date of search. In search, no incriminating material indicating any undisclosed income for the year under consideration was found. Section 153A empowers the AO to issue notice

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

2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year under consideration were not pending on the date of search. In search, no incriminating material indicating any undisclosed income for the year under consideration was found. Section 153A empowers the AO to issue notice

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

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

39,64,509 \n26,79,94,750 \n5,11,79,000 \n56,31,38,249 \nBased on this calculation again the assessee was asked to show cause as \nto why the aforementioned addition should not be made in his hand. The \nassessee submitted his reply which was considered by the ld. AO but was \nnot found tenable. Ld. AO also

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF), JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

39,64,509 26,79,94,750 5,11,79,000 56,31,38,249 \n\nBased on this calculation again the assessee was asked to show cause as \nto why the aforementioned addition should not be made in his hand. The \nassessee submitted his reply which was considered by the ld. AO but was \nnot found tenable

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

2,18,50,444/- 2. Enhancement by the ld. CIT(A) 4,69,22,650/- 4,69,22,650/- 1. 1. The main source of receipts/income of the assessee is annual fees from its members, rent, interest and Misc. receipts. In the present case the ld. AO has issued the notice u/s 148 on dt. 28.02.2018(PB38)on the reasons

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

section 147/148 of the Act are not applicable in such cases. No contrary decision has been brought to our notice. Accordingly, we hold that initiation of proceedings u/s 147/148 by the A.O. to reassess the income is illegal being without jurisdiction and consequently the reassessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143 (3) is also illegal and void ab initio

CASTAMET WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,KHARWA vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR

2) shall also apply in relation to a case where an assessee claims that no expenditure has been incurred by him in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under this Act: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall empower the Assessing Officer either to reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2014. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year under consideration were not pending on the date of search. In search, no incriminating material indicating any undisclosed income for the year under consideration was found. Section 153A empowers the AO to issue notice