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)

u/s 153C of the Act. For ready reference we quote section 153C as under:- “ 153C. 79[(1)] 80[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 or requisitioned, 81belongs

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)

u/s 153C of the Act. For ready reference we quote section 153C as under:- “ 153C. 79[(1)] 80[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 or requisitioned, 81belongs

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)

147 read with section 143(3)- Condition precedent- Notice u/s 143(2) Omission to issue notice under section 143(2)- Deject not curable - Section 292BB not applicable- Reassessment

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

section 147\nThe 2nd last para of the 1st page of the Jurisdictional AO's report is a para numbered (i),\nwhich deals with the limitation aspect, does not anywhere contradicts the proviso to\nsection 147 that restricts the ld. AO to take action u/s 147 after a lapse of four years if the\nassessment u/s 143(3) has earlier

DESH RAJ JAKHAR,GORDHANPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NEEM KA THANA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

u/s 143(2) is still available and also the time of regular as well as scrutiny assessment is available upto 30.09.2016. (A) Wrong Facts.- (1) Alleged as ITR not filed but the ITR is filed: The Ld. A.O. has stated in the grounds for reopening of the assessment, that the assessee has not filed

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 147 r.w.s 148? Ground No. 1 Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in quashing the reopening and reassessment under Section 147 of the Act ignoring that the case was reopened as per clause (c) of Explanation 2 to Section 147 and with the Kedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 be upheld as valid\nand in accordance with the law.\n2. The addition of ₹44,62,938/- under Section 2(22)(e) be upheld, as the\nAppellant has failed to disprove the findings of the AO.\n3.\nThe appeal of the Appellant be dismissed, and the order of the Ld. CIT(A)\nbe upheld

RAGHAV KUMAR DHOOT,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

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

reassessment notice upon him-Held, yes-\n2.4 With regard to the contention of the assessee that the assessment\ncompleted is invalid in absence of notice u/s 143(2) by the DOT, Central\nCircle-1, Jaipur who had completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the IT\nAct, 1961 on 18/04/2021, it is to be stated here that notice u/s 143

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 147\nr.w.s 148?\nGround No. 1\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in\nquashing the reopening and reassessment under Section 147 of the Act ignoring that\nthe case was reopened as per clause (c) of Explanation 2 to Section 147 and with the\n27\nITA No. 872 & others/JP/2024\nKedia Builders

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

u/s 153C. The assessments relating to search material are governed by provisions of section 153A/153C. The relevant provisions of section 153A and 153C are quoted below: - Assessment in case of search or requisition. 153A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person where

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 147\nr.w.s 148?\n\nGround No. 1\n\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in\nquashing the reopening and reassessment under Section 147 of the Act ignoring that\nthe case was reopened as per clause (c) of Explanation 2 to Section 147 and with the\n\n27\nITA

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

reassessment u/s 147 of the Act ignoring that the\nreason to belief of the AO is founded on information which has been received by\nthe AO after completion of assessment, which is a sound foundation for\nexercising power u/s 147 r.w.s 148?\n2.3 In ITA No. 874/JP/2024 the revenue has raised the following grounds;\n1 Whether on the facts

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

reassessment proceedings undersection 143(3)\nread with section 147 and made addition on account of long-term capital gain\narising from sale of agricultural land Assessee contended that Assessing\nOfficer had wrongly assumed jurisdiction and framed assessment without issuing\nany notice under section 143(2) -Whether pursuant to return of income filed by\nassessee, Assessing Officer remained under a statutory

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

reassessment proceedings undersection 143(3)\nread with section 147 and made addition on account of long-term capital gain\narising from sale of agricultural land Assessee contended that Assessing\nOfficer had wrongly assumed jurisdiction and framed assessment without issuing\nany notice under section 143(2) -Whether pursuant to return of income filed by\nassessee, Assessing Officer remained under a statutory

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

reassessment proceedings undersection 143(3)\nread with section 147 and made addition on account of long-term capital gain\narising from sale of agricultural land Assessee contended that Assessing\nOfficer had wrongly assumed jurisdiction and framed assessment without issuing\nany notice under section 143(2) -Whether pursuant to return of income filed by\nassessee, Assessing Officer remained under a statutory

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

reassessment proceedings undersection 143(3)\nread with section 147 and made addition on account of long-term capital gain\narising from sale of agricultural land Assessee contended that Assessing\nOfficer had wrongly assumed jurisdiction and framed assessment without issuing\nany notice under section 143(2) -Whether pursuant to return of income filed by\nassessee, Assessing Officer remained under a statutory

LOVELY PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

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

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

section 147 of the Income Tax Act, [Here in after referred as “Act” ] by the AO. 2 Lovely promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds:- “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming the AO's order dated 26-03-2022 passed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

reassessment under Section 147, 148 & 148A of the Act in a faceless manner. Proceedings under Section 147 and Section 148 of the Act would now have to be taken as per the 34 ITA No. 656/JP/2023 & CO No. 06/JP/2023 ITO vs. Mukesh Kumar Soni procedure legislated by the Parliament in respect of reopening/ re-assessment i.e., proceedings under Section 148A