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)

reassessment proceedings under section 147 of the Act. 3. Before us, the ld. CIT D/R has vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. On the contrary, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has reiterated the submissions as made before the ld. CIT (A) and further submitted as under :- “ The Ld. A.O. while initiated proceedings u/s 148 recorded following

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

M/S VIJAYETA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

u/s 153A without any reference to the incriminating material found, then no addition can be made to the returned income of the assessee. 12. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT v. Kabul Chawla (supra) while considering an identical issue has held as under:- “37. On a conspectus of Section 153A(1) of the Act, read with

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

section 13(3)] of his audit report [Form 10B] that payment of salary was paid to Persons Specified u/s 13(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961. 4. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,20,000/- made on account of excess salary

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 was not valid and the same is quashed. The appeal on Ground No 1 to 1.3 are thus allowed. 1. In view of the above decision on Ground No 1 to 1.3, appeal on Ground No 2 to 2.4, 3, 4 and 5 have become infructuous and no further adjudication is required on merits

ITO WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR vs. M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY G-1/35 TO 37, 47, 48 EPIP, JEWELLERY ZONE, SITAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by ld.AO, without properly satisfying himself and establishing that any income of assessee has escaped assessment and thus the consequent order deserves to be hold bad in law. 1.1 That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the reopening of assessment by ignoring the fact that the assessment for the impugned

M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY INDIA LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-7(4), JAIPUR

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

147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by ld.AO, without properly satisfying himself and establishing that any income of assessee has escaped assessment and thus the consequent order deserves to be hold bad in law. 1.1 That the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the reopening of assessment by ignoring the fact that the assessment for the impugned

SHRI RAI SINGH SIHAG,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-1, 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. 441/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Cuke I.T.O. Vs. B-105, Vaishali Nagar, Ward- 3(1), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Bgvps 4485 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta & Shri S.L. Jain (Advs.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By :Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13/07/2017 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. The Reasons For Reopening Of The Assessment Not Valid :- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Ao Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Invoking Action U/S 147.The Notice For Reassessment Is So Hastily Issued Without Examining The Correct Factual & Legal Position. The Action For Reassessment Is Often Made Without Application Of Mind Fairly & Objectively The Ao. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 Itr 437 (Sc)

3)- Condition precedent- Notice u/s 143(2) Omission to issue notice under section 143(2)- Deject not curable - Section 292BB not applicable- Reassessment not valid- Income Tax Act, 1961, ss. 143,147,292BB 336 ITR 678 - CIT V/s Rajeev Sharma (Allahabad) (Case laws Paper book pages 62-68) Reassessment - Procedure - Return in response to Notice u/s 148 - Assessing Officer

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

13-09-2010] examined\nthis issue. Head notes of this decision are as under-\"Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Income escaping assessment\nGeneral -Assessment year 2001-02 In reassessment, Assessing Officer can\nmake addition even on ground on which reassessment notice might not have\nbeen issued, but he arrives at a conclusion that such other income

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

13-09-2010] examined\nthis issue. Head notes of this decision are as under-\n\n\"Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Income escaping assessment\nGeneral -Assessment year 2001-02 In reassessment, Assessing Officer can\nmake addition even on ground on which reassessment notice might not have\nbeen issued, but he arrives at a conclusion that such other

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.”

13) of section 144C of the Income-tax Act or issuance of notice under section 148 as per time-limit specified in section 149 or sanction under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, and the time limit for completion of such action expires on the 30th day of April, 2021 due to its extension by the said notifications, such

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

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 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

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

SAVITA GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO, DELHI

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

3. In this regard, we would like to submit the provision contained in Section 153C of the Income Tax Act as follows:- “153C. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 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

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

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)

u/s 143(3) of the Act and the order passed by the Ld AO deserves to be quashed. The assessee company would like to give here under the brief of objection no 2 raised by the company and reply submitted by the Ld AO as also mentioned on Page no 4 of the Assessment Order under section 147 of Income