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

129 ITD 278,\nthe relevant extracts of which are as below:-\n“10. In this case, the Assessing Officer initiated the proceeding under section 154 of\nthe Act and said proceeding, as per record, has not reached the finality, either by\ndropping the same or passing any order in the said proceeding. ...\nAdmittedly, in this case, the mandate of section

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.”

129 c. Section 148A(d) – to pass an order deciding whether or not it is a fit case for issuing a notice under Section 148; and d. Section 148 – to issue a reassessment notice. 80. In Ashish Agarwal (supra), this Court directed that Section 148 notices which were challenged before various High Courts “shall be deemed to have been issued

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)

129 c. Section 148A(d) – to pass an order deciding whether or not it is a fit case for issuing a notice under Section 148; and d. Section 148 – to issue a reassessment notice. 80. In Ashish Agarwal (supra), this Court directed that Section 148 notices which were challenged before various High Courts “shall be deemed to have been issued

SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment under\nsections 148 & 147/148 - Held, yes - Whether therefore, where basis for initiation\nof section 148 proceedings in case of assessee was material seized relating to or\nbelonging to assessee during search conducted on 'M' Group, notices issued\nunder section 148 and impugned orders rejecting objections filed to issuance of\nnotice were to be quashed and set aside - Held

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

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

reassessment was completed after making additions of Rs.\n6,93,32,499/- making additions u/s 68 of the Act on account of\nunexplained credits in the grab of bogus sales and thus, the total income\nwas finally assessed at Rs.16,49,44,849/- (PB 62-69) vide the order u/s\n143/147 at 15.04.21.\nLater on, the Id. CIT acting u/s

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

u/s 153A cannot be sustained and is hereby deleted as the same is without basis of incriminating material unearthed during the search action on the appellant and impugned addition could have been done by the learned assessing officer in re-assessment proceedings by issuance of notice under section 147/148. The ld. AO is directed to take necessary action in this

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

u/s 153A cannot be sustained and is hereby deleted as the same is without basis of incriminating material unearthed during the search action on the appellant and impugned addition could have been done by the learned assessing officer in re-assessment proceedings by issuance of notice under section 147/148. The ld. AO is directed to take necessary action in this

SMT. LAKSHMI AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-4(5), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with no orders as to costs

Bench: recording satisfaction for issuance of notice since the information is specific. Thus the reasons recorded for re-opening is on borrowed satisfaction and not on any satisfaction by the AO. The

147 of the Act before the AO during the course of reassessment proceedings. Only after evaluating and verifying the records in data base, it was found and noticed by the AO that the 13 SMT. LAKSHMI AGARWAL VS ITO, WARD 4(5), JAIPUR assessee had not filed her return of income. Therefore, under these circumstances, no original scrutiny proceedings

LATE SH. BIRDI CHAND THROUGH LEGAL HEIR MUKESH SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

u/s 142(1) dated 30.10.2018 in the name of assessee instead of in the name of legal heir. In response thereto the A/R of assessee vide letter dated 03.11.2018 again brought to the notice of ld. AO that Late Shri Birdi Chand is no more and left heavenly abode on 09.01.2018. In spite of these information with the knowledge

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. SUPREME POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the results the appeal of the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

reassessment under Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 8 153. ………………….. 30. The argument that by enactment of Section 153A to 153D has not eclipsed Section 148 does not enhance the case of respondent to initiate the proceedings under Section 148. On fulfillment of two conditions for invoking Section 153C the proceeding in accordance with Section 153A are to be initiated

RAGHAV COMMODITIES,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment order and it is only FAO which could issue notice under section 148 and not JAO - Held, yes [Paras 35 and 36] [In favour of assessee] 17 Raghav Commodities vs. ITO Section 148, read with section 148A, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income escaping assessment - Issue of notice for (Applicability of TOLA) - Assessment years

GOYAL VEGOILS LIMITED ,KASAR ,KOTA vs. DCIT , CIRCLE -2, KOTA

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

147 of the Act is bad in law and needs to be quashed. 1.15 The Hon’ble ITAT, Surat in the case of Sandipkumar Parsottambhai Patel vs. ITO in ITA Nos. 08 & 09/SRT/2019 vide its judgement dated 29.11.2021, in exactly identical circumstances, following their earlier decision in the cases of Nishant Kantilal Patel & Muktaben Nishantbhai Patel has quashed the reassessment

SPECTRUM FOODS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment under section 147 of the Income Tax Act 1961. Later, during the investigation proceedings of the case, it was also found that the assessee had also obtained fake profit entry by getting the client code modified through a broker. On analysis of the original client code and the modified client code, it can be seen that there

PARIS ELYSEES INDIA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

Bench: Him Against The Order Dated 05.12.2019 Passed Under Section 147/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, [ For Short “Act” ] By Acit, Circle-07, Jaipur.

u/s 147 is illegal and deserves to be quashed. GROUND NO. 3 ADJUSTMENT OF Rs. 83,74,399 UNDER CLAUSE (i) TO EXPALNATION 1 TO SECTION 115JB(2). SUBMISSIONS 1. Ld. AO was under misconception that such write off of CWIP would be covered under clause (i) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB(2) i.e., the amount set aside

TIJARIA POLYPIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRLCE 4, JAIPUR

section 148 of the Act has been issued\nlegally and the other objections of the appellant have also been dealt with in the\nparagraphs above. Accordingly grounds of appeal No. 1 to 1.3 are hereby\ndismissed.\"\n3.2 During the course of hearing, the Id. AR of the assessee submitted\nthat reassessment proceedings-initiated u/s

BALVEER SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(3) JAIPUR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 was issued on\n29/03/201,9 which was duly served upon the assessee.\"\nThere was enough material to validate that the reassessment proceedings are\nvalid. Since in this case there is a clear link between information available\nwith AO and his formation of belief that income chargeable

NARESH KUMAR BHARGAVA,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

129 (MAD.) “In the absence of any finding that there is loss of revenue, interference under section 263 of the Act was not justified. 7.2.iii Eveready Industries India Ltd [2020] 181 ITD 528 (Kolkata - Trib.) “…The Hon'ble Supreme Court, held that for invoking powers conferred by S.263; the CIT should not only show that the AO's order

RAVINDER SINGH THAKKAR,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Reassessment proceedings were completed without affording assessee\nwith opportunity to cross examine third party from whom material relied\nupon was found/ whose statements were heavily relied upon for\nreopening;\nDetailed submission made by assessee in this regard before Id.CIT(A) was\nsummarily rejected by Id.CIT(A). In fact, Id. CIT(A) has not addressed all the\nabove aspects

RAVINDER SINGH THAKKAR,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

reassessment proceedings so initiated on borrowed\nsatisfaction and completed without disposing off objections raised by\nassessee is against the settled legal position and order so passed\ndeserves to be set aside.\n1.2\nOn the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law,\nId.CIT(A) has erred in confirming the observations of Id.AO regarding not\nallowing the assessee