DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SHRI RAJLAXMI DENIM, BHILWARA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

9 DCIT Vs. Shri Rajlaxmi Denim paragraph of its order that no material was found during the search is factually unsustainable since the entire case and arguments before the departmental authorities as well as the Tribunal had proceeded on the basis that the document embodying the transaction with Mohini Sharma was recovered from the assessee. While summarizing the contentions

RAJ KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

9. Conclusion - In view of the aforesaid discussion and various case laws cited above it is humbly requested that penalty in this case may not be levied because of the following facts: - (i) There is no valid ground given in the assessment order for initiating penalty proceedings. (ii) The initiation of penalty is statutorily defective. (iii) The assessee filed

LATE SHRI JITENDRA NAGAR THROUGH HIS L/R SMT. DEEPIKA NAGAR,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD BARAN, BARAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

9) TMI 347 - ITAT MUMBAI], we are of the considered view that the notice issued by the Assessing Officer u/sec.148 of the Act dated 30.07.2022 by obtaining prior approval from the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Hyderabad dated 27.07.2022 and consequential final assessment order dated 02.03.2024 passed by the Assessing Officer u/sec.147 r.w.s.144C(13) of the Act is illegal

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)

vi) The head note in the case of CIT Vs Raj Kumar Arora [2014] 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) is as under: "Section 1534, read with section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961-Search and seizure - Assessment in case of (Scope of assessment) - Assessment year 2000- 01-Whether Assessing Officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only

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)

vi) The head note in the case of CIT Vs Raj Kumar Arora [2014] 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) is as under: "Section 1534, read with section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961-Search and seizure - Assessment in case of (Scope of assessment) - Assessment year 2000- 01-Whether Assessing Officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only

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)

vi) The head note in the case of CIT Vs Raj Kumar Arora [2014] 52 taxmann.com 172 (Allahabad) is as under: "Section 1534, read with section 143 of the Income-tax Act, 1961-Search and seizure - Assessment in case of (Scope of assessment) - Assessment year 2000- 01-Whether Assessing Officer has power to reassess returns of assessee not only

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

The appeal stands allowed

9(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the summons must be properly addressed and sent by registered post. In the present case, the notice was sent by speed post at the following address as per the postal receipt: "SH R. K. Prop M/s. Karol Bagh New Delhi, PIN 110065" Clearly, the above is not the address

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)

9(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the summons must be properly addressed and sent by registered post. In the present case, the notice was sent by speed post at the following address as per the postal receipt: "SH R. K. Prop M/s. Karol Bagh New Delhi, PIN 110065" Clearly, the above is not the address

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

9. What Section 153A contemplates is that, notwithstanding the regular provisions for assessment/ reassessment contained in the IT Act, where search is conducted under Section 132 or requisition is made under Section 132A on or after 31 / 5 / 2003 in the case of any person, the Assessing Officer shall issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish return

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139 on 29.12.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act. 11 ITA Nos. 1284(4)/JP/2018 Smt. Reema Harish Bhatia, Kota. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139 on 29.12.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act. 11 ITA Nos. 1284(4)/JP/2018 Smt. Reema Harish Bhatia, Kota. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139 on 29.12.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act. 11 ITA Nos. 1284(4)/JP/2018 Smt. Reema Harish Bhatia, Kota. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139 on 29.12.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act. 11 ITA Nos. 1284(4)/JP/2018 Smt. Reema Harish Bhatia, Kota. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139 on 29.12.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act. 11 ITA Nos. 1284(4)/JP/2018 Smt. Reema Harish Bhatia, Kota. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139 on 29.12.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation was carried out on 03.03.2016. It is also not in dispute

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. There is no dispute that the assessee filed the return of income under section 139 on 29.12.2012 which was processed under section 143(1) of the IT Act. Subsequently, a search and seizure operation was carried out on 03.03.2016. It is also not in dispute

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

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

9. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee has submitted that in compliance to notice under section 153A of the IT Act, the assessee submitted its return of income on 22.02.2019 declaring therein total income at Rs. NIL (after claiming current year loss of Rs. 7,678/-) as was declared in the original e-return filed under section

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

vi. Insofar as pending assessments are concerned, the jurisdiction to make the original assessment and the assessment under Section 153A merges into one. Only one assessment shall be made separately for each AY on the basis of the findings of the search and any other ITA Nos. 1057 to 1062 & 1210/JP/2018. M/s. Kota Dall Mill, Kota. material existing or brought