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

147 and section 148 of the Income\r\nTax Act 1961 itself provide the opportunity to assessee for filing the return of\r\nincome, hence we could not say that the Income Tax Return was late filed. And\r\nthe Return filed u/s 148 is treated as filed u/s 139 and all the provision are\r\napplicable for the same

SAROJ DEVI HALDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

u/s 147/1448 of the Income-\ntax Act dated 13.12.2019 Assessing total Income at Rs 90,97,047/-.\n5. 2. It is further noted and as detailed in preceding para above that during\nthe appellate proceedings, the appellant has not furnished any substantial written\nsubmission or documentary evidence in support of its grounds of appeal\nchallenging the addition. The onus lies

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.”

2. These extended reassessment notices were issued by the Assessing Officers under the provision of section 148 of the Income-tax Act. 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") following the procedure prescribed under various sections pertaining to reassessment namely sections 147 to 151, as they existed prior to their amendment by the Finance Act, 2021 (hereinafter referred

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

section 148, before making the\nassessment u/s 147, the AO is required to serve on the assessee a notice\nrequiring him to furnish return of his income. Thus service of notice u/s 148 is a\ncondition precedent to make the assessment u/s 147. In the present case, as\nevident from the assessment order, AO issued notice u/s 148

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal stands allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

section 148, before making the assessment u/s 147, the AO is required to serve on the assessee a notice requiring him to furnish return of his income. Thus service of notice u/s 148 is a condition precedent to make the assessment u/s 147. In the present case, as evident from the assessment order, AO issued notice u/s 148

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)

Reassessment proceedings were completed—Assessee claimed that the notice u/s 147 was unsustainable because it was not approved by the competent authority in accordance with Section 151—CIT(A) sanctioned re-assessment proceedings through issuance of notice u/s 148—ITAT’s allowed assessee’s appeal by holding that the CIT lacked the authority to sanction re-assessment proceedings through issuance

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

reassess six\npreceding years and the year of search.\n• For concluded assessments, additions can only be made based on\nincriminating material found during the search.\nCitation:\n• CIT v. Singhad Technical Education Society (2017) 397 ITR 344 (SC)\nThe AO acted same and addition was made on seized documents only, THE\nOWNER SHIP OF SEIZED DOCUMENT IS NOT DENIED

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)

Reassessment proceedings were completed—Assessee claimed that the notice u/s 147 was unsustainable because it was not approved by the competent authority in accordance with Section 151—CIT(A) sanctioned re-assessment proceedings through issuance of notice u/s 148—ITAT’s allowed assessee’s appeal by holding that the CIT lacked the authority to sanction re-assessment proceedings through issuance

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)

2 to new section 148 is akin to section 153A and section 153C. Corollary being that after seizing of operational period of section 153A to 153D, the cases being dealt thereunder were circumscribed in the scope of newly substituted section 148. 29. The Department has not set up a case that for initiating proceedings under section 148 it had material

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 read with 147 may kindly be upheld as valid and within limitation: 2. The assessee's admission regarding applicability of peak credit method may be treated as confirmation of income escapement on merits; 3. Alternatively, and without prejudice, in the event of an adverse procedural finding. the Revenue may be granted liberty to initiate

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

2 challenges the legality of the proceeding u/s. 148 of the Act. As is evident that the case of the assessee is for A. Y. 2016-17 and in this case notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued on 02.06.2021. That notice so issued u/s 148 (Old regime) on 02.06.2021, was treated as notice under section 148A

SAVITA GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO, DELHI

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

2 to new Section 148 is akin to Section 153A and Section 153C. Corollary being that after seizing of operational period of Section 153A to 153D, the cases being dealt thereunder were circumscribed in the scope of newly substituted Section 148. 29. The Department has not set up a case that for initiating proceedings under Section 148 it had material

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

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

reassessment\nproceedings under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act cannot be initiated\nmerely based on the audit report. An audit is principally intended for the purpose of\nsatisfying the auditor with regard to the sufficiency of rules and procedures\nprescribed for the purpose of securing an effective check on the assessment,\ncollection and proper allocation of revenue

MAHENDRA SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(2) cannot be dispensed with.\"\n(emphasis added)\n\n1.6That issue of a notice u/s143(2) of the Act, is mandatory even in a reassessment\nproceeding initiated u/s 148 of the Act has been clearly laid down by the Hon'ble\nDelhi High Court in the case of M/s. Alpine Electronics Asia PTE Ltd. V/s DGIT

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

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

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

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 147. The action of Id. CIT (A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the reassessment proceedings. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Id. AO has erred in re- opening the case of the assessee by issuing notice under section 148