SHRI KRISHNARAJ BUILDHOME PVT LTD,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

48, be deemed to be the full\nvalue of the consideration received or accruing as a result of such transfer.\n(2) Without prejudice to the provisions of sub-section (1), where—\n(a) the assessee claims before any Assessing Officer that the value\nadopted or assessed 51 [or assessable] by the stamp valuation authority\nunder sub-section (1) exceeds

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.”

48,07,150/- as deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or amend any ground on or before the date of hearing.” Ground No. 1 and 1.1 are regarding validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings under section

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

MAHAVEER YADAV,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

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

48,98,790/- under the head “Profits and Gains from Business”. 2.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in not considering the fact that for better realization of its capital asset, the HUF sold the agricultural land after plotting and the same being not a capital asset u/s 2(14) of the Act, the same

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

2) of the Act is a jurisdictional pre-condition to finalizing the reassessment. (iv) The onus is on the Revenue to show that proper service of notice has been effected under Section 148 of the Act on the Assessee or an agent duly empowered by him to accept notices on his behalf. In the present case, the Revenue has failed

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

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

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

2 Annexure A Exhibit-2 47 and back side of Residential premises 48, 50 to 54 3 Annexure A Exhibit-5 1 to 77 Residential premises 4 Annexure AS Exhibit- 1 to 3,7,9,10 Office premises 1 5. Further in the statements of Shri Madan Mohan Gupta, he submitted that on the above page, details w.r.t. a land

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

reassess under section 147 or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the assessee under section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2001. 28. The correctness of the claim of the Assessee for the purpose of Section 14A read with Rule

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

48 taxmann.com 347 (Ker.). The facts of this case are not relevant to the facts of the present case as the assessee has not challenged the issue of notice for six previous years under section 153A of the Act. Thus the said judgment is inapplicable under the facts of the present case. Another judgment cited

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

SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN ATIKSHAYA KESHTRA,PADAMPUA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1, KAILASH HEIGHTS

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

reassessment proceedings. The additions made are on the following reasons: 10 Shri Digamber Jain Atikshaya Keshtra I. Accumulation of Income under section 11(2) Rs.1,11,000 II. Income from House Property under section 24(a) Rs.1,48

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)

reassessment order which has attained finality, unless the materials gathered in the course of the proceedings under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act establish that the reliefs granted under the finalised DCIT vs. M/s Royal Jewellers assessment/reassessment were contrary to the facts unearthed during the course of 153A proceedings. The above quoted passage was also approved by Bombay High

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)

reassessment order which has attained finality, unless the materials gathered in the course of the proceedings under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act establish that the reliefs granted under the finalised DCIT vs. M/s Royal Jewellers assessment/reassessment were contrary to the facts unearthed during the course of 153A proceedings. The above quoted passage was also approved by Bombay High

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)

reassessment order which has attained finality, unless the materials gathered in the course of the proceedings under Section 153A of the Income-tax Act establish that the reliefs granted under the finalised DCIT vs. M/s Royal Jewellers assessment/reassessment were contrary to the facts unearthed during the course of 153A proceedings. The above quoted passage was also approved by Bombay High

RSD CONTAINERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

48 (SC) Pr. CIT v. NDR Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 138 taxmann.com 499 (SC) 7. Misplaced Reliance on Abhisar Buildwell (SC) Inapplicable The assessee's claim that reassessment under Section 147 is barred due to Abhisar Buildwell v. PCIT (SC) is wholly misplaced. Abhisar Buildwell dealt with Section 153A/153C, ie., search assessments, and held that additions unrelated to incriminating material

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S KOTA DALL MILL, KOTA

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding. 16. Section 153A bears the heading "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is "well settled as held by the Supreme Court

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

2) provides for revival of any assessment or reassessment which stood abated, if any proceeding or any order of assessment or reassessment made under section 153A of the Act is annulled in appeal or any other proceeding. 16. Section 153A bears the heading "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is "well settled as held by the Supreme Court