SAVITA GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO, DELHI

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassess total income of such other person of such assessment year in the manner provided in section 153A.” 4. Section 153C of the Act begins with a non-obstante clause and overrides sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151, and 153. It mandates that if during a search (initiated on or before 31st March, 2021], any books of account, documents

PRAMILA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(5), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 153A to 153D have\nprevalence over the regular provisions of assessment or reassessment u/s\n143 and 147 / 148. In this

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

153D have prevalence over the regular provisions for assessment or reassessment under Section 143 & 147/148. 27. Section 153A and 153C starts with non-obstante clause. The procedure for assessment/reassessment in Section 153A, 153C in cases of search or requisition has an overriding effect to the regular provisions for assessment or reassessment under Sections 139,147

RESONANCE EDUVENTURES LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

RESONANCE EDUVENTURES LIMITED,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, KOTA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

RESONANCE EDUVENTURES LIMITED,,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , KOTA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D of the Act and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the ITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without application of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

RESONANCE EDUVENTURES LIMITED,KOTA,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search\noperation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D of the Act and that such approval\nis not meant to be given mechanically. The Court also concurs with the finding of the\nITAT that in the present cases such approval was granted mechanically without\napplication of mind by the Additional CIT resulting in vitiating

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL PARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result , the appeal for the Assessment Year 2016-17 filed by the Revenue and the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee for the same assessment year are also dismissed

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

147, 148, 149, 151 & 153. 28. The language of explanation 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. CO No. 16 & 18/JPR/2024 Vimal Parwal, Jaipur

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL PARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result , the appeal for the Assessment Year 2016-17 filed by the Revenue and the Cross-Objection filed by the assessee for the same assessment year are also dismissed

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

147, 148, 149, 151 & 153. 28. The language of explanation 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. CO No. 16 & 18/JPR/2024 Vimal Parwal, Jaipur

SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

153D have\nprevalence over regular provisions for assessment or reassessment under\nsections 148 & 147/148 - Held, yes - Whether therefore, where basis for initiation\nof section 148 proceedings in case of assessee was material seized relating to or\nbelonging to assessee during search conducted on 'M' Group, notices issued\nunder section 148 and impugned orders rejecting objections filed to issuance of\nnotice

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

u/s section\n11 (2) and 11(1)(a) of the\nAct\n33,50,772/-\n33,50,772/-\n5.\nUnverifiable Creditors\n16,75,286/-\n16,75,286/-\n6.\n15% of Construction\nExpenses\n1,20,00,440/-\n1,20,00,440/-\n7.\nDisallowance of Rs\n3,69,567 out of total\nexpenses

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

u/s 153C of the Act.\n\nAt this juncture, kind attention of your goodself is invited to section 153C, which\nreads as under:\n\n153C. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section\n147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the\nAssessing Officer is satisfied that,—\n\n(a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable

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

u/s 12A of\nthe IT Act vide registration certificate No. 8/1993-94/2609dt. 10.08.1994 (PB 37).\nSince the issues challenged by way of these appeals are identical in nature in all the\nyears and for sake of convenience we are submitting common submission. That year\nwise detail of issue under challenge and addition made by the ld. Assessing officer &\nCIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. SUPREME POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the results the appeal of the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

reassessment under Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 8 153. ………………….. 30. The argument that by enactment of Section 153A to 153D has not eclipsed Section 148 does not enhance the case of respondent to initiate the proceedings under Section 148. On fulfillment of two conditions for invoking Section 153C the proceeding in accordance with Section 153A are to be initiated

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically and while elaborate reasons need not be given, but there has to be some indication that approving authority has examined draft orders and finds that it meets requirement of law [Headnotes reproduced] 4. Reliance

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically and while elaborate reasons need not be given, but there has to be some indication that approving authority has examined draft orders and finds that it meets requirement of law [Headnotes reproduced] 4. Reliance

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically and while elaborate reasons need not be given, but there has to be some indication that approving authority has examined draft orders and finds that it meets requirement of law [Headnotes reproduced] 4. Reliance

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically and while elaborate reasons need not be given, but there has to be some indication that approving authority has examined draft orders and finds that it meets requirement of law [Headnotes reproduced] 4. Reliance

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

reassessment is passed pursuant to a search operation is a mandatory requirement of section 153D and that such approval is not meant to be given mechanically and while elaborate reasons need not be given, but there has to be some indication that approving authority has examined draft orders and finds that it meets requirement of law [Headnotes reproduced] 4. Reliance