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

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

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

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

2) of the Act stipulates that no order of reassessment can be\npassed beyond the period of one year from the expiry of the financial year in\nwhich service of the notice was effected. Section 148(1), however, is clear that no\nreassessment can take place without service of notice being effected on the\nassessee or his authorised representative

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

SHRI MADHO LAL SAINI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

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

Reassessment pursuant to material found in search can be done through recourse to section 153C only and not by invoking the provisions of section 147/148. 1.12. The provisions of section 153C are over-riding in nature and contain non obstante clause for sections 139,147,148,149,151 and 153. 1.13. Section 147 and 153C are not interchangeable

SH. KAPIL TANEJA,JAIPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

56-60 Copy of Notice issued u/s 142(1) dated 16.01.2023 10. Copy of Reply dated 30.01.2023 to notice issued u/s 143(2) read with 61-63 11. section 147 Copy of draft Assessment order dated 02.05.2023 64-68 12. Copy of Written Submission dated 13.01.2025 in filed before Ld.CIT

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

2 and others-JP-2025 DCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others appropriate proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act, relying on the same judgment of Abhisar Buildwell (supra), CBDT Instruction No. 1/2023 (CLC 35-40), and the provisions of Section 150 of the Act. The assessee, while supporting the ultimate relief granted, is aggrieved by the directions given

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

2 and others-JP-2025 DCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others appropriate proceedings under Section 147/148 of the Act, relying on the same judgment of Abhisar Buildwell (supra), CBDT Instruction No. 1/2023 (CLC 35-40), and the provisions of Section 150 of the Act. The assessee, while supporting the ultimate relief granted, is aggrieved by the directions given