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

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

10. Ld. AO further noted that the information related to beneficiaries identified from Banka Group of cases [date of search 21.05.2018] has been received from the DDIT(Inv.), Unit-1(3), Kolkata vide letter No. 8851 dated 01.03.2019. As per information, a search & seizure/survey action in the Kedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur case of Banka Group was conducted

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

reassessment\norder passed by Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 is\nbad in law—Assessee's grounds allowed.\nPrayer: Thus in view of the above facts, circumstances and the legal position of\nlaw the proceedings so initiated and assessment so passed may kindly be\nquashed.\n4. The Id. AO has denied the exemption u/s 10

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

reassessment\norder passed by Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) read with Section 147 is\nbad in law—Assessee's grounds allowed.\nPrayer: Thus in view of the above facts, circumstances and the legal position of\nlaw the proceedings so initiated and assessment so passed may kindly be\nquashed.\n4. The Id. AO has denied the exemption u/s 10

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

20 हजार रूप्ये से कम के एक\nमुश्त भुगतान किये गये दिखाये गये है। नकद भुगतान एवं उधार भुगतान द्वारा खरीदी गई\nसामग्री की मात्रा, दर एवं मूल्य के विवरण तथा स्टॉक रजिस्टर आदि नही रखने के कारण\nसे कौन सी खरीदी गई सामग्री कितनी मात्रा में कब कब किस-किस कार्य में प्रयुक्त की\nगई, सत्यापन किया जाना संभव

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Mr. Manchanda, learned counsel\nfor the appellant, took us through several sections of Mulla's Principles of Mohammedan\nLaw including sec. 268 and submitted that in the circumstances of the case it must be\npresumed that the three ladies were the legally wedded wives of the respondent. The law\nhas not changed since

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

20,00,385 was added. The appellant\nalso submitted that since it has been legally settled that the AO is not entitled to reopen a\nreturn for review and since in this case, the AO issued the notice u/s 148 of the Act on\n28/03/2019 merely as a process of review, the reassessment is not legally invalid. The\nappellant relied

DINESSH KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD4(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

10]\nIn view of aforesaid the notice under section 148, the reasons to believe and the order disposing\nof the objections and all consequential proceedings deserved to be quashed and struck down\n[Para 11]\n\n10\n\nITA No. 1393/JPR/2024\nShri Dinesh Kumar Sharma, Jaipur.\n\nIn the present case as well, reasons to believe are founded

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)

10 Sh. Kapil Taneja vs. DCIT (i) After considering the judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, notice issued u/s 148 of the Act is barred by limitation. (ii) Reopening by jurisdictional Assessing officer and by Faceless Assessing Officer, which is contrary to the specific provisions of section 151A (iii) Notice u/s 148 being issued

SAVITA GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO, DELHI

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

20,000/-. Relying solely on this document, the Ld. AO reopened the assessment under section 147 on 28.04.2020 and passed an order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144/144B. 2. The critical legal question that arises here is: Can proceedings under section 148 of the Act be initiated,as on 28.04.2020,against a person other than the searched person, where the only basis

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND KOTHARI, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction.” ITA Nos. 1190 & 1298/JP/2019 & 66/JP/2020 3 Sh. Prakash Chand Kothari, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur 3. In ITA No. 1298/JP/2019, the Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

SHRI PRAKASH CHAND KOTHARI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings being illegal and without jurisdiction.” ITA Nos. 1190 & 1298/JP/2019 & 66/JP/2020 3 Sh. Prakash Chand Kothari, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur 3. In ITA No. 1298/JP/2019, the Revenue has taken the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

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 VIJAY KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 59/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Vijay Kumar Agarwal, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. 7/58, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Ward 4(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Advpa 6150 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Pravin Kr. Saraswat (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/05/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 27/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Learned C.I.T. (A) Has Erred For Not Considering The Issue For Validity Of Issue Notice U/S 148 Of I.T. Act, 1961, While There Was No Escapement Of Income On Part Of Assessee. The Initiation Of Proceedings Was Only On Behest Of I.T.O. Ward 3(2), Who Has Intimated To A.O. For Advancement Of Loan Rs.53,95,000/- Given By Assessee To Pooja Agarwal, While Concern A.O. Has Accepted Said Loan In Her Hands After Detailed Examination. Hence Initiation Of 2

10 ITA 59/JP/2019_ Vijay Kr Agarwal Vs ITO An information was received from a) Unexplained expenditure in ITO, Ward 3(2), Jaipur’s letter No. executing contract works met from 311 dated 14/07/2014 that during undisclosed sources of income Rs. the course of asstt. Proceedings in 51,28,143/-, being 92% of deemed the case of Smt. Pooja Agarwal

PRAMILA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(5), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment notice under section 148 and order disposing objections were to\nbe quashed - Held, yes [Paras 14 and 15][In favour of assesse]\n\n[2024] 168 taxmann.com 219 (Delhi - Trib.) Archit Gupta v. ACIT*\n\nSection 10(38), read with section 148, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains\nIncome arising from transfer of long term securities (Penny

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

20. Coming to the second part, this tells us what the\nAO did with the information so received. He says: \"The information so received\nhas been gone through.\" One would have expected him to point out what he found\nwhen he went through the information. In other words, what in such information\nled him to form the belief that income

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

10 . The only ground on which notice under section 148A(d) was issued was that in the view of the leaned AO there were deposits in the bank account of the assessee in cash of Rs, 36,47,00,000/- later on adopted Rs. 65,37,47,750/- and such deposits were before the sales could happen. In other words

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.”

reassessment proceedings and the order, dated 25/05/2023, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act are quashed as bad in law being 10 Late Shri Jitendra Nagar through L/R Smt. Deepika Nagar, Baran. violative of the provisions contained in Section 148A(d), Section 148 and Section 151(ii) of the Act. Decided in favour of assessee

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

20. Coming to the second part, this tells us what the\nAO did with the information so received. He says: \"The information so received\nhas been gone through.\" One would have expected him to point out what he found\nwhen he went through the information. In other words, what in such information\nled him to form the belief that income