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

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

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)

147 validly. 7.2. There is no need to discuss the merits of the AO'S additions as the reassessment has been considered as void and illegal. In any case, the issue brought up by the AO in the reassessment were dealt with by the Hon'ble jurisdictional Tribunal in the appellant case for the assessment year 2015-16. Based

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 131 to the directors of these companies remained\nunserved. Similarly, commissions issued to the DDIT(Inv.), Unit-1(3), Kolkata to record\nstatements of the directors revealed that these companies were non-existent and did\nnot have any business activities.\n3. Findings of the Assessing Officer\n1) Entities providing share applications/premium lacked creditworthiness.\n2) Third-party enquiries confirmed

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 131 to the directors of these companies remained\nunserved. Similarly, commissions issued to the DDIT(Inv.), Unit-1(3), Kolkata to record\nstatements of the directors revealed that these companies were non-existent and did\nnot have any business activities.\n\n3. Findings of the Assessing Officer\n1) Entities providing share applications/premium lacked creditworthiness.\n2) Third-party enquiries confirmed

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

u/s 131 to the directors of these companies remained\nunserved. Similarly, commissions issued to the DDIT(Inv.), Unit-1(3), Kolkata to record\nstatements of the directors revealed that these companies were non-existent and did\nnot have any business activities.\n3. Findings of the Assessing Officer\n1) Entities providing share applications/premium lacked creditworthiness.\n2) Third-party enquiries confirmed

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. NISHA JAIN, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

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

reassessment order u/s 143(3) r/w 147, has started with the total income as assessed after giving effect to the order of the CIT (A) u/s 250 dt. 09.04.2019 at Rs. 75,95,250/-. Therefore, the ld. AO cannot blow hot and cold in the same breath now. 3. It is submitted that S. 44AB of the Act has been

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

147\nof the Act. Therefore, the argument of the appellant are not found to be\nacceptable.\nFurther the addition made by the AO are based on return filed in response to\nnotice issued u/s 148. Before the notice, there was no return filed by the\nassessee. Therefore, the notice issued u/s 148 is found to be valid. The\nappellant

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

DCIT, CC-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S. DANGAYACH HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

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

147\nof the Act. Therefore, the argument of the appellant are not found to be\nacceptable.\n\nFurther the addition made by the AO are based on return filed in response to\nnotice issued u/s 148. Before the notice, there was no return filed by the\nassessee. Therefore, the notice issued u/s 148 is found to be valid. The\nappellant

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO WARD 4(2)), JAIPUR

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO by mere change of opinion is patently illegal, cannot be faulted with. 13. The ITAT having arrived at the categorical finding that reopening of the completed assessment without any fresh material, merely on the basis of change of opinion of the AO, is without jurisdiction and erroneous, the appeal preferred by the Revenue

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

reassessment proceedings initiated by the AO by mere change of opinion is patently illegal, cannot be faulted with. 13. The ITAT having arrived at the categorical finding that reopening of the completed assessment without any fresh material, merely on the basis of change of opinion of the AO, is without jurisdiction and erroneous, the appeal preferred by the Revenue

SMT. SHEELA YOGI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, ground no. 3 & 4 of the assessee’s appeal are allowed

Bench: Him Under Rule 46A Of The Income Tax Act, 1962. 2(I) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. Lower Authorities Grossly Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act.

147 of the Act. 2 Sheela Yogi, Jaipur Vs. ITO, Jaipur (ii) On the facts & circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. AO grossly erred in initiating reassessment proceedings on borrowed satisfaction only. 3. On the facts & circumstances of the case & in law also Ld Lower authorities grossly erred in making and confirming a huge addition

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)

u/s. 124 was not applicable as Assessee was filling his return of income with ITO at Chennai—ITAT held that Assessee was regularly filing his returns of income at Chennai and at time of issuance of notice under Section 148, ITO at Suratgarh had no jurisdiction over Assessee—Held, High Court found no error or illegality in observations

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)

u/s. 124 was not applicable as Assessee was filling his return of income with ITO at Chennai—ITAT held that Assessee was regularly filing his returns of income at Chennai and at time of issuance of notice under Section 148, ITO at Suratgarh had no jurisdiction over Assessee—Held, High Court found no error or illegality in observations