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.”

section 151(new regime). Consequently, the assessment u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Act dated 24.03.2023, stands quashed. 3.5 Hon’ble ITAT, Mumbai Bench in the case of ACIT v. Surya Ferrous Alloys Pvt. Ltd. [2025] 1 TMI 326 after considering the aforesaidjudgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajeev Bansal (supra) has held: Validity of reassessment

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)

u/s. 151(ii) of the Act. PRAYER In view of the above facts, statutory provisions, and judicial precedents, it is most respectfully prayed that: 1. The impugned notice dated 26.07.2022 issued under Section 148 for A.Y.2016- 2017 be quashed and set aside. 2. The consequential reassessment order dated 29.05.2023 passed under section 147 r.w.s 144B

PRAMOD KUMAR CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 the procedure laid down in sections subsequent\nto section 139, including that laid down by section 144B, has to be followed”\n3. From the above judgment, there remains no ambiguity that the procedural\nprovisions for making the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act has to be\nfollowed while reassessment u/s

VINITA BAJORIA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 370/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vinita Bajoria 1, Ganesh Colony Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur बनाम Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AEBPB4873M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Manoj Choudhary, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gorav Avasthi, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hear

reassessment proceedings and the Assessment Order, dated 26.05.2023, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act are quashed. 35 Vinita Bajoria vs. ITO 10 Even if the argument of the revenue is accepted that the since the time limit for issuance of notice was not expired in this case being A. Y. 2016-17 the notice issued

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

147 rws 144B\r\nGOA-2: Disallowance of deduction u/s 2,47,549/- u/s 80P Under chapter VI-A:\r\nFACTS:1.The brief facts of the case that the society is a co-operative society\r\nregistered under Rajasthan Cooperative society Act IV of 1953. The society\r\ndeals in the trading & distribution of agriculture produce & agriculture\r\nimplements

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

147 of the Act,\n\n(b)\nissuance of notice under section 148 of the Act, shall be through\nautomated allocation, in accordance with risk management strategy formulated by\nthe Board as referred to in section 148 of the Act for issuance of notice, and in a\nfaceless manner, to the extent provided in section 144B of the Act with

RSD CONTAINERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings and the Assessment Order, dated 11.05.2023, passed under Section 147 read with Section 144B of the Act are quashed. 10 Even if the argument of the revenue is accepted that the since the time limit for issuance of notice was not expired in this case being A. Y. 2017-18 the notice issued u/s

RAM KHILARI MEENA,DAUSA vs. ITO, DAUSA, DAUSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short “Act”] by Assessment Unit of Income Tax Department [ for short AO]. 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. That the ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in law in sustaining the addition made by ld. AO on account of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of land

ACIT, NCR BUILDING, JAIPUR vs. HANS RAJ AGARWAL, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR JAIPUR

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

reassessment u/s 147 read with Section 144B of the Act was not valid. Conclusion 38. In view of the above

BRIGHT SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed with no order as to\ncosts

144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is without recording\nproper reasons.\n2.\nUnder the facts and circumstances of the case, the\nAssessing Officer has erred in making the addition of Rs. 41,34,571/-\nby disallowing the loss claimed by the assessee as fictitious loss from\nshare transaction in equity derivatives without considering the\nsubmission of the assessee

SUSHILA DEVI JANGID,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 374/JP/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2010-11 Smt. Sushila Devi Jangid 65, Koshaliya Vihar Hajyawala,Muhana Mandi Ke Pass, Sanganer, Jaipur 302 029 बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward 7(2) Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFMPJ 2091 P निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Utkarsh Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by :Shri Gautam Sing

Reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act for relevant A.Y still reflect as on-going proceedings under ‘For your action’ list on ‘e-proceedings’ tab on the Income Tax profile of the assessee. Also, there is no Order u/s 144 r.w.s 147 dated 24.12.2017 available under ‘For your information’ list on ‘e- proceedings’ tab on the income tax profile

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)

reassessment and without giving the deduction under section 801C, are not according to the law and facts of the case. 8. That the order passed under section 250 of Income Tax Act by the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) without providing the proper opportunity of being heard, is contrary to the principles of natural justice and equity and liable

SH. MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

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

reassessment proceedings is not in accordance with law as notices u/s 148A and 148 as well as order u/s 148A(d) have been passed by JAO instead of FAO, which 19 SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL VS DCIT,CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR is not in accordance with specific provisions of statue. Thus order passed u/s 147 is bad in law and deserves

SUSHILA CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, NFAC, DELHI

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

147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961 [ for short “Act”] by the National Faceless Assessment\nCentre [ for short ld. AO.]\n2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following\ngrounds:-\n\"1. The Id. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the present case in\ninitiating reassessment proceedings u/s

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)

section 147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, [ for short “AO”] by Faceless Assessment Unit. 2 Raghav Commodities vs. ITO 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the reopening the assessment u/s 147

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 144 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is void ab-initio and deserves to be quashed. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 16,56,453/- made by the Learned Assessing Officer u/s 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on account

BARODA RAJASTHAN KHESTRIYA GRAMIN BANK,AJMER vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

144B of the Act, dated 25.03.2022 by the AO/NFAC would not be disturbed, and would be free from fresh assessment proceedings. The AO shall take care the same while framing the assessment order, afresh.” 9 Baroda Rajasthan Kheshtriya Gramin Bank vs. PCIT 5. Feeling aggrieved from the above order of the PCIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act, the present

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

144B dated 21.03.2022, as well as the\naction taken u/s 147/148 and notices are bad in law, illegal, invalid, void-ab-intio\non facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction, without proper approval and\nsatisfaction of higher authorities u/s 151 of the Act, and also barred by limitation\nand various other reasons and hence the same may kindly