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

SHRI BHANWAR LAL KHICHI,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-3, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment.” Thus, it is settled proposition of law that the notice issued by the authority other than the prescribed authority is not valid and consequential order passed by the ld. CIT(E) is without jurisdiction. The show cause notice confers the jurisdiction to proceed and to pass the order. In case the notice itself is not valid then the jurisdiction

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

5) Where effect to an order under section 250 or section 254 or section 260 or section 262 or section 263 or section 264 is to be given by the Assessing Officer [or the Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] wholly or partly, otherwise than by making a fresh assessment or reassessment [or fresh order under section 92CA

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

5-8) was merely not legally justified. 2. No prior detection nor any mala fide intention of the assessee: It is vehemently submitted that totality of the facts & circumstances if considered fairly and honestly, clearly suggest that it is not at all a case of deliberate attempt with a mala fide intention to suppress the income repeatedly but wrongly alleged

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

5-8) was merely not legally justified. 2. No prior detection nor any mala fide intention of the assessee: It is vehemently submitted that totality of the facts & circumstances if considered fairly and honestly, clearly suggest that it is not at all a case of deliberate attempt with a mala fide intention to suppress the income repeatedly but wrongly alleged

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

5-8) was merely not legally justified. 2. No prior detection nor any mala fide intention of the assessee: It is vehemently submitted that totality of the facts & circumstances if considered fairly and honestly, clearly suggest that it is not at all a case of deliberate attempt with a mala fide intention to suppress the income repeatedly but wrongly alleged

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