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)

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153 made it clear that provisions of these sections are not made applicable to the assessments covered by the provisions of section 153A. Prior to the introduction of these three sections, there was a separate chapter XIV -B of the Act, by section 158BC to 158BE which governs the search assessments

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)

reassessment u/s 147 of the Act ignoring that the reason to belief of the AO is founded on information which has been received by the AO after completion of assessment, which is a sound foundation for exercising power u/s 147 r.w.s 148? 2.3 In ITA No. 874/JP/2024 the revenue has raised the following grounds; 1 Whether on the facts

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

section\n40A(3) are herewith annexed at paper\nbook pg no. 102-118 with a request to\nconsider them before passing an order.\nb.) the audit proceedings by the audit\nwing and\nc.) the proceedings u/s 147.\nThus, the primary data was already\nprovided by the assessee and thus the\nallegation of non-disclosure of\ninformation and discovering the same

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

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

section 147, the AO had to\nestablish failure on the part of appellant to disclose fully and truly all material fact\nnecessary for assessment which is a pre-requisite for issue of notice u/s 148\n15\nITA No. 872 & others/JP/2024\nKedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur\nbeyond 4 years. In the instant case, I find that

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

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

section 147, the AO had to\nestablish failure on the part of appellant to disclose fully and truly all material fact\nnecessary for assessment which is a pre-requisite for issue of notice u/s 148\n\n14\nITA No. 872 & others/JP/2024\nKedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur\nbeyond 4 years. In the instant case, I find that

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

section 147, the AO had to\nestablish failure on the part of appellant to disclose fully and truly all material fact\nnecessary for assessment which is a pre-requisite for issue of notice u/s 148\nbeyond 4 years. In the instant case, I find that the AO had failed to establish any\nfailure on the part of appellant to disclose

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 147 has been provided, however no such copy was furnished to\nthe appellant during assessment proceedings.\n\n2.5 In view of above, it is evident that the notice under section 147 and further assessment\nproceedings were invalid.\n\nGround of Appeal No. 2-\n\nThat the Ld. Assessing Officer is not justified making addition amounting to Rs.15

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)

reassessment notice under section 148 of the new regime. Thus, in this illustration, the time limit for issuance of a notice under section 148 of the new regime will end on 18 August 2022.” On perusal of judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajeev Bansal, in order to determine the validity of notice issued u/s

SAVITA GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO, DELHI

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A.” 4. Section 153C of the Act begins with a non-obstante clause and overrides sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151, and 153. It mandates that if during a search (initiated on or before 31st March, 2021], any books of account, documents

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 147 for carrying out the present reassessment proceedings. 30. In this regard, we refer to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer before issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. In the reasons so recorded, the Assessing Officer refers to the information received from the office of DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur pursuant to search and seizure action

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 147 for carrying out the present reassessment proceedings. 30. In this regard, we refer to the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer before issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. In the reasons so recorded, the Assessing Officer refers to the information received from the office of DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur pursuant to search and seizure action

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

u/s. 147 are for the benefit of revenue and are aimed at gathering the "escaped income" of an assessee. It ITA No. 960/JP/2018 & CO No.05/JP/2020 9 M/s Apollo Animal Medical Group Trust vs. ITO (E) has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that although for reassessment of income there must exist reasons to believe that income has escaped

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,- (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, belongs to; or (b) any books of account or documents, seized or requisitioned, pertains or pertain to, or any information contained therein, relates to, A person other than

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

12 within the meaning of Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961. From the above we noticed that no addition for Rs. 53,95,000/- being loan given forming the main `reason for escapement of income’ u/s 147 of the Act has been made by the AO and instead, the additions have been made on new different grounds

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

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

u/s 139(1) of the Act. The total income of the trust (before\nallowing exemption under sections 11 and 12) exceeds the maximum amounts\nwhich is not chargeable to tax, it is required to file its return in Form ITR-7,\nbefore the date specified in section 139. However, no return of income was\nfiled. Therefore, the assumption of jurisdiction

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 proceedings on the\nbasis of reasons recorded on incorrect assumption of facts and non-application of mind\nby the Assessing Officer at the time of recording of the reasons and even the approval\ngranted mechanically by the concerned sanctioning authority. In this regard, we refer to\nthe reasons recorded by the Assessing officer before issuance of notice 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

u/s 147 has no legal basis and\nresultant reassessment proceedings deserve to be set aside. Our viewis fortified by\nthe decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Meenakshi Overseas Pvt.\nLtd. (supra) wherein it was held as under:-\n\n19. A perusal of the reasons as recorded by the AO reveals that there are three\nparts

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 proceedings on the\nbasis of reasons recorded on incorrect assumption of facts and non-application of mind\nby the Assessing Officer at the time of recording of the reasons and even the approval\ngranted mechanically by the concerned sanctioning authority. In this regard, we refer to\nthe reasons recorded by the Assessing officer before issuance of notice 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

u/s 147 has no legal basis and\nresultant reassessment proceedings deserve to be set aside. Our viewis fortified by\nthe decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Meenakshi Overseas Pvt.\nLtd. (supra) wherein it was held as under:-\n19. A perusal of the reasons as recorded by the AO reveals that there are three\nparts