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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

147. f. The notice has not been issued in faceless manner as per provisions of section 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Regarding the whole proceedings the appellant has following objections :- Notice without proper sanction and not in accordance with law a. The first notice u/s 148 dated 02.06.2021 with an allegation of concealment of income of more than

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)

section 151A of the Act and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. Thus in view of above, it is noted that initiation of 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

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

151A – Whether after introduction\nof 'Faceless Jurisdiction of Income-tax Authorities Scheme, 2022' and 'e-\nAssessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022' it became\nmandatory for revenue to conduct/initiate proceedings pertaining to reassessment\nunder sections 147, 148 and 148A in a faceless manner Held, yes - Whether\nsince in instant case impugned proceedings under section 148A as well as\nconsequential notice

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

u/s 80P(2)(d)\r\nof the Act. The assessee's claim of deduction under chapter VIA was not\r\nallowable as per the provision of section 80AC of the Act and thereby the\r\nclaim was not allowed by disallowing the same and thereby it is clear that\r\nno addition was made on the issue upon which

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)

151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. The notice u/s 148 dated 27.07.2022 is invalid and bad in law as the order u/s 148A(d) is passed by JAO who again has issued the notice u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act 1961. In support of above, reliance is placed on the order of the Hon’ble High Court

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

section 151A of the Act and the\nsame deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is thus prayed that the\nconsequential order passed u/s 147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

section 151A of the Act and the\nsame deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is thus prayed that the\nconsequential order passed u/s 147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

section 151A of the Act and the\nsame deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is thus prayed that the\nconsequential order passed u/s 147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

section 151A of the Act and the\nsame deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is thus prayed that the\nconsequential order passed u/s 147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. HEM CHAND JAIN, JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

u/s 148 of the Act dt. 23.07.2022 is bad in law as it is not in accordance with section 151A of the Act read with Notification No.18/2022 dt. 29.03.2022 issued by the CBDT. Section 151A of Act is reproduced as under:- Faceless assessment of income escaping assessment 151A. (1) The Central Government may make a scheme, by notification

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

section 151A of the Act and the\nsame deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is thus prayed that the\nconsequential order passed u/s 147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN,KOTA vs. ITO WD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

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

151A of the Act. Hence proceedings as well\nas the impugned notice deserves to be quashed. Moreover, the assessment proceeding\nconsequent thereto also deserves to quashed.\n1. 3. The impugned additions and disallowances made in the order u/s 147 r.w.s 144 of the\nAct dated 01.03.2023 are bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction

RADHAKISHNA BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

u/s. 148 of the Act. The AO has relied upon the various case laws in his favour. In the remand report, the AO did not accept the submissions of the appellant in this regard and has relied upon the OM dated 20.02.2023 issued by CBDT wherein it has been clarified that even after insertion of Section 151A

RADHAKISHAN BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

u/s. 148 of the Act. The AO has relied upon the various case laws in his favour. In the remand report, the AO did not accept the submissions of the appellant in this regard and has relied upon the OM dated 20.02.2023 issued by CBDT wherein it has been clarified that even after insertion of Section 151A

SUNIL CHABLANI,AJMER, RAJASTHAN vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

section 263 of the Act is clearly\napplicable and it is clear that the Assessing Officer has passed the assessment order\nafter making enquiries for verification which ought to have been made in this case.\nHowever, we find that the Pr. CIT has not mentioned in the show-cause notice issued\nunder section 263 that he is going to invoke

DURGA PRASAD SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

147 read with section 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is upheld in full. 6.2 In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 5. Feeling dissatisfied with the above finding so recorded in the order of the ld. CIT(A) the assessee appellant has preferred the present appeal before this tribunal on the grounds as reiterated herein above. In support

NISHA MUKESH KUMAR JAIN,BHILWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-1, BEAWER, BEAWER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

151A of the Act; The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter and/or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 3. At the outset of the hearing the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the additional ground no. 2 raised by the assessee is not pressed and submitted that the additional ground