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

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

d) Addition/disallowance of Rs.2,18,50,444/- u/s 40(a)(ia) on account of non deduction of TDS. (e)The ld. AO has disallowed the income of Rs.33,50,772/- (33,45,494/- +5,278/-) and also taxed the same @ Maximum Marginal Rate U/s 164(2). The Id. AO has alleged that the assessee trust is doing business activities

AMIT JAIN,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment u/s 148 and notices were issued. In response, the assessee submitted the reply. The details of the notices issued and replied by the assessee were as under: Date of notice Under Issued By Response due dates Reply submitted Section on 09.02.2023 ITO, Pune-13(2) 01.03.2023 22.02.2023 148A 29.03.2023 148 ITO, Pune-13(2) 14.04.2023 11.10.2023 142(1) Faceless

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

11 of I.T. Act. 1961 and also held that the 'A' has made investment in violation of Sec. 13(1) (d) and thereby taxed the income u/s. 164(2) and(3). That the Ld. CIT(A) also erred in not allowing the ground. 4. That the Id A.O. grossly erred disallowing the donation Expenses

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI VIMAL CHAND SURANA(HUF), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

11 Shri Vimal Chand Surana HUF such reason is material and relevant to form a belief that there is an escaped assessment, no action under section 147 of the Act can be taken. The Appellant submits that the reasons recorded for reopening of the Assessment do not make out any such ‘live link’ between the materials on which conclusions

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

11 DCIT Vs. Vimal Chand Surana (HUF) case may be, has to be only about the fitness of the case to be subject to proceeding by reassessment under section 148 only on the basis of the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer. Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Shiv Rattan Soni [2008] 217 CTR 222 (Rajasthan

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)

D-25, Lal Bahadur nagar, Jaipur, through him i.e. Shri Madan Mohan Gupta. The deal was finalized at Rs. 12,43,27,000/- out of which discount of Rs. 1% was allowed for registration of land. Therefore, Rs. 13,30,84,000/- were net payable to the seller and the details of the same have been recorded on page

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

1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of ld. AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, justified, arbitrary and against the fact of the case. Relief may please be granted

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)

d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos. 872 to 875 & 901/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 to 2016-17 cuke Income Tax Officer, Kedia Builders and Colonizers Vs. Jaipur Pvt. Ltd., A-6-10, Shyam

RSD CONTAINERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

11-21 3 Screen shot of information with AO used for issue of notice u/s 148 22 4 Notice u/s 148 dated 02.06.2021 23 5 Notice u/s 148 dated 28.07.2022 24 S. No. Description Page No. 1 Assessment Order u/s 147 in the case of Rachit Jain A.Y 2016-17 1-3 23 RSD Containers

KOSHAL KISHOR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT(INTL. TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment or re-computation under section 147. Unless, the notice was served on the proper person in the manner prescribed under section 282, the service was insufficient and AO did not have jurisdiction to re-assess the escaped income. Thus, the service of notice under section 148 was no service in the eye of law and all subsequent proceedings including

KOSHAL KISHOR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT(INTL. TAX.) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

reassessment or re-computation under section 147. Unless, the notice was served on the proper person in the manner prescribed under section 282, the service was insufficient and AO did not have jurisdiction to re-assess the escaped income. Thus, the service of notice under section 148 was no service in the eye of law and all subsequent proceedings including

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)

d) dated 26.07.2022 8. 54-55 Copy of Notice issued u/s 148 dated 26.07.2022 9. 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

SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

1) of section 153A opens, the A.O. has no jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act in respect of those 29 ITA Nos. 152, 153/JP/18 & 517, 518/JP/17. Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. six assessment years which falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of section 153A of the Act and accordingly the A.O. was not justified in issuing notice

SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

1) of section 153A opens, the A.O. has no jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act in respect of those 29 ITA Nos. 152, 153/JP/18 & 517, 518/JP/17. Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. six assessment years which falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of section 153A of the Act and accordingly the A.O. was not justified in issuing notice

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

1) of section 153A opens, the A.O. has no jurisdiction to issue notice u/s 148 of the Act in respect of those 29 ITA Nos. 152, 153/JP/18 & 517, 518/JP/17. Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. six assessment years which falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of section 153A of the Act and accordingly the A.O. was not justified in issuing notice

SONU AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

1 TMI 326 vide order dated 24.12.2024 after considering the aforesaid judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra) has held: Validity of reassessment proceedings - non-compliance of taking prior approval by the specified authority required u/s. 151 - Scope of “by whom” in procedural compliance for issuance of notice u/s.148 - amended provisions under the Act read with TOLA

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMPTIONS,CIRCLE,JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

d) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The funds of the GITS are being not used for charity purpose which is violation of section 11 and 12. Therefore the Society is not eligible for exemption u/s 11 of the Act. 5.1 In view of above facts the case was reopened and notice u/s148 was issued after taking due approval

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