ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

reassessment [or fresh order under section 92CA, as the case may be], such effect shall be given within a period of three months from the end of the month in which order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 is received by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal Commissioner or Commissioner

AJOY SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

sections 80C, 80CCF, 80D,\n80DD and 80G to the tune of Rs. 1,00,000/-, 20,000, Rs 15,000/-, Rs\n1,00,000/- and Rs. 24,000/- respectively and further claiming loss under the\nhead \" Income from House Property\" at Rs 70,000/- thereby declaring net\ntaxable income of Rs. 10,58,800/- and refund

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

80G etc.). However, the given notice u/s 133(6) in no\nmanner shows (or alleges) that some wrong claim was made by the assessee\nwith a view to conceal and/or to furnish inaccurate particulars. The notice simply\nrequired the assessee to provide certain information related to/ in support of the\ndeductions claimed. It is not the case

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

80G etc.). However, the given notice u/s 133(6) in no\nmanner shows (or alleges) that some wrong claim was made by the assessee\nwith a view to conceal and/or to furnish inaccurate particulars. The notice simply\nrequired the assessee to provide certain information related to/ in support of the\ndeductions claimed. It is not the case

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

80G etc.). However, the given notice u/s 133(6) in no\nmanner shows (or alleges) that some wrong claim was made by the assessee\nwith a view to conceal and/or to furnish inaccurate particulars. The notice simply\nrequired the assessee to provide certain information related to/ in support of the\ndeductions claimed. It is not the case

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

80G etc.). However, the given notice u/s 133(6) in no\nmanner shows (or alleges) that some wrong claim was made by the assessee\nwith a view to conceal and/or to furnish inaccurate particulars. The notice simply\nrequired the assessee to provide certain information related to/ in support of the\ndeductions claimed. It is not the case

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

reassessment.\n5.\nThe said section is not applicable in the present as the contentions raised are\nrelating to illegality of the Impugned Order as well as exercising power without authority\nof law and without jurisdiction.\n6.\nIn view of the above, the Ld. CIT(E) has wrongly contended that Appellant has\nparticipated in the proceedings therefore, it is precluded from

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

reassessment proceedings are quashed and set-aside. 19. Now, we refer to the appeal filed by the Revenue wherein the findings of the ld CIT(A) have been challenged. 20. In this regard, the ld DR relied on the findings of the AO and our reference was drawn to Para 3.1 to 3.4 of AO’s order which reads

M/S GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,TELANGANA vs. PCIT 2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings. This being the case, the assessment\norder could not be subjected to revision u/s 263 and the action of Ld.\nPr.CIT in invoking jurisdiction u/s 263 could not be sustained in the eyes\nof law. Similar is the view of the Tribunal in assessee's group concern i.e.\nM/s Reliance Corporate IT Park