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)

u/s 131 on the address of above companies requesting furnishing of books of accounts, details of bank accounts, copies of Kedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur ITR and other documents, but the same could not be served due to non-existence of the companies on their respective given addresses. From the Database of the department, it is gathered that

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

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

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 on various judicial decisions that the AO cannot reopen concluded\nassessment merely to re-examine any transaction for non-application of his mind on the\nmaterials already with him.\n\n5.13 The Hon’ble Supreme Court

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)

147 of the Act is void-ab-initio and addition so made deserves to be deleted outrightly. Reassessment is done in violation to provisions of section 151A of the Act In this regard it is submitted that assessment in the present case has been reopened as well as completed without following provisions of section 151A, which provides procedure for “Faceless

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

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s 147

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

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\n\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s

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

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s 147

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

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s 147

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

u/s 148 on dt. 28.02.2018(PB38)on the reasons (PB 39) that “During the assessment year 2014-15, the assessee has not filed any return of income.As per AIR/CIB information generated on AST, it is noticed that assesseehad received amount of Rs.22,37,64 1/- as per 26AS and refund interest received for the A.Y. 2011-12 of Rs.5

RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORP. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue

147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. Issue notice u/s 148 for the A.Y. 2008-09 in which the sand transaction falls.” It is apparent that the reasons for issuing the notice u/s 154 as well as the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment u/s 147/148 of the Act are same to re-compute the deduction u/s 80IA after

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORTATION LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and Revenue

147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. Issue notice u/s 148 for the A.Y. 2008-09 in which the sand transaction falls.” It is apparent that the reasons for issuing the notice u/s 154 as well as the reasons recorded for reopening of the assessment u/s 147/148 of the Act are same to re-compute the deduction u/s 80IA after

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 of the 1961 Act. Therefore, I dismiss Ground No. 1 raised in this regard by the appellant. 7. Vide ground no. 2, the appellant contented that the issue of notice is illegal and unjust. The condition of section 149 of escaped income being represented by asset' is not satisfied. 7.1 During appellate proceedings, vide submission dated 13.02.2024, the appellant

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

115 CCH 0026 KolHCReassessment—\r\nReopening of assessment—Assessee filed return of income declaring a total\r\nincome of Rs. NIL—Return was processed under Section 143 (1—A survey was\r\nconducted from which it was found that assessee has deposited money with\r\nNIL—It was further seen that said company is a specified person of assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

reassessment order or just\na day before when it was passed and the petitioner participated in proceedings. In\nthe present case, the challenge to the initiation of proceedings was subjudice\nbefore this Court and during the pendency, the order under Section 147 of the Act\nwas passed.\n\n18. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

147. Thus, the\naforesaid decision was not available on the day when Ld. AO passed the\nsubjected Order on 15.04.2021. Therefore, the Ld. AO has committed\nno mistake because the Apex Court decision was not available before\nhim. It is not the case that the adjudication of the assessment is still\nopen, before Ld.AO after the availability of the Apex

PRADEEP KUMAR,JHUJHUNU vs. ITO WARD -2, JHUJHUNU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

u/s. 147 for deposits in bank amounting Rs.11,00,000—Held, Bombay High Court in case of CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd., 331 ITR 236 has held that sec. 147 has this effect that AO has to assess or reassess income ("such income") which escaped assessment and which was basis of formation of belief and if he does

SYLVAN GREENS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

reassessment and without giving the deduction under section 80IC, are not according to the law and facts of the case. The assessee would like to submit as under: a) The assessee's plant is situated at Khasra No 4,5 & 58, Mauza Kulhariwala PO Barotiwala Tehsil, Baddi District Solan (HP) 174103 which is backward area and the assessee is also

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

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement

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

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement

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

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement