SAROJ DEVI HALDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

2) of section 148.]\n[Explanation 4.—For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that the provisions of this\nsection, as amended by the Finance Act, 2012, shall also be applicable for any assessment\nyear beginning on or before the 1st day of April, 2012.]\nThe perusal of the above section reveals that the section starts with

ARVIND KUMAR AGRAWAL,GURGAON vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INCOEM TAX DEPARTMENT

In the results, the appeal of assessee stands dismissed

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

section 56(2)(vii) which states that stamp duty of the date of agreement may be adopted where the part consideration has been paid otherwise than the cash. 5 Arvind Kumar Agrawal vs. PCIT The assessment was completed under e-proceeding while accepting the income declared by the assessee accepting the explanation offered by the assessee. Later

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

56(2)(vii)\nThe assessee objected on the addition made by the AO u/s 41(1) as \ncessation of liability. Considering the facts of the case during the appellate \nproceedings show cause notice was issued to the appellant vide dated 12.07.2024. \nIt is observed that the assessee received an amount of Rs.15 cr. in AY 2014-15 \nwithout any consideration

MAHENDRA SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

2, the order of reassessment passed by the\nTribunal is declared null and void. The questions are answered in favour of assessee and\nagainst the Department."\n\n30\nITA No. 654/JPR/2023\nMahendra Sharma vs. ITO .\n\nThus on the above legal position of law the notice under section 148 or\nproceedings under section 147/148 and consequent assessment order liable

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

SH. KESAR LAL BAIRWA,A-24, VARUN COLONY, MANDARA STAND, NEW SANGANER ROAD, MANSAROVAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings rejected the claim of assessee that the amount so received being capital receipt is not liable for taxation by holding as under :- (i) Supreme court decision in case of CIT vs. Ghanshyam (HUF) was pronounced on 16.07.2009 whereas section 56(2

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

56. Section 153A of the Act is titled "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is connected to Section 132 which deals with 'search and seizure'. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power which enables the Revenue to re- open at least six years of assessments earlier

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

DHANUKA REALTY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

reassessment proceedings, issued notice u/s. 148 and passed order u/s 143(3) r.w.s.147 adding an amount of Rs 49,50,000 in the total income of assessee, are unjustified and liable to be cancelled. 2. That the ld. Commissioner (appeals) erred in sustaining the levy of tax made by the A.O. u/s.56(1) of the I.T. Act on the total

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

2) of Section 56, the, such sum shall not be deducted from the cost for which the asset was acquired or the written down value or the fair market value, as the case may be, in computing the cost of acquisition]’’ The ld. CIT(A) has decided this issue in para 7.1. to 8.7 as under:- ‘’7.1 I have considered

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

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. Ld. AO also went on to observe that the entries made by \nthe

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) of the Act stipulates that no order of reassessment 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

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)

56. Section 153A of the Act is titled "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is connected to Section 132 which deals with 'search and seizure'. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power which enables the Revenue to re open at least six years of assessments earlier

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)

56. Section 153A of the Act is titled "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is connected to Section 132 which deals with 'search and seizure'. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power which enables the Revenue to re open at least six years of assessments earlier

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)

56. Section 153A of the Act is titled "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is connected to Section 132 which deals with 'search and seizure'. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power which enables the Revenue to re open at least six years of assessments earlier

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

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

56. Section 153A of the Act is titled "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is connected to Section 132 which deals with 'search and seizure'. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely ITA Nos. 1057 to 1062 & 1210/JP/2018. M/s. Kota Dall Mill, Kota. potent power which enables the Revenue

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

56. Section 153A of the Act is titled "Assessment in case of search or requisition". It is connected to Section 132 which deals with 'search and seizure'. Both these provisions, therefore, have to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely ITA Nos. 1057 to 1062 & 1210/JP/2018. M/s. Kota Dall Mill, Kota. potent power which enables the Revenue