RAMAKANT SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 264/Jp/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Ramakant Sharma, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. S/O- Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, 1 Ward-3(5), Vimal Kunaj, Vidyut Nagar, Behind Jaipur. Bharat Petrol Pump, Jaipur. Pan No.: Bjrps 5130 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv) & Shri Satish Gupta (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/12/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 05/12/2016 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. Lower Authorities Grossly Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. A.O. Grossly Erred In Resuming Jurisdiction Without Serving Notice U/S 148 On The Appellant Assessee As Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Not Served On The Appellant.

45 days instead of 15 days for compliance. Such notice is prescribed under Rule 12(1A) which in turn prescribes Form 2B for block return. 20) Section 158 BC(b) is a procedural provision for making a regular assessment applicable to Block assessment as well. Section 158 BC(c) would require the assessing officer to compute the income as well

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.”

Section 148-A(d) in respect of each of the assesses concerned.” Further, it directed the assessing officers to issue a notice under section 148 of the new regime “after following the procedure as required under Section 148-A.” Although this Court waived off the requirement of obtaining prior approval under Section 148A(a) and Section 148A

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

section 147 of the Income-tax Act would squarely apply to the case of the assessee. We find no infirmity in the order passed by the Tribunal. Hence, the appeal is dismissed." 19. In an identical circumstances, a learned single Judge of this Court considered the issue in the decision reported in Fenner (India) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income

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)

3) of section 143 a presumption can be raised that such an order has been passed on application of mind. It is well known that a presumption can also be raised to the effect that in terms of clause (e) of section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act judicial and official acts have been regularly performed. If it be held

MAHAVEER YADAV,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

reassessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the cash so found deposited in his bank account relates to cash receipt on sale of the plots of land. Based on field inspection done by an inspector of the Department and based on information received from Tehsildar, the AO determined that the assessee has sold 20 residential plots for an amount

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)

reassessment u/s 147 of the Act was not valid and the same is quashed. The appeal on Ground No 1 to 1.3 are thus allowed. 1. In view of the above decision on Ground No 1 to 1.3, appeal on Ground No 2 to 2.4, 3, 4 and 5 have become infructuous and no further adjudication is required on merits

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

45 CO 38 & 39/JP/2018 Multimetals Ltd, Vs DCIT Supreme Court in the case of Andaman Timber Industries vs. CCE (supra) while dealing with the issue of violation of principles of natural justice for not providing the opportunity of cross examination of the witnesses whose statements were relied on by the AO has held in para 6 to 9 as under

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

3) Kolkata to DCIT Central Circle, Ajmer vide order under section 127 dated 02.11.2018 of the PCIT-1, Kolkata for investigation being a case linked to Bangur Group of Bhilwara. 5. The DCIT Central Circle, Ajmer issued notice u/s 153A to the appellant company on 21.02.2019 requiring the assessee company to file return under section 153A within 10 days

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S BARAN ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD., KOTA

45 & 46/JP/2018 : 10. In these Cross Objections, the assessee has raised the following common grounds for both the assessment years :- “ 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order passed u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law, void-ab-initio, and deserves

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S BARAN ROLLER FLOUR MILLS PVT. LTD., KOTA

45 & 46/JP/2018 : 10. In these Cross Objections, the assessee has raised the following common grounds for both the assessment years :- “ 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order passed u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is bad in law, void-ab-initio, and deserves