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)

e) Procedure for making block assessment: (i) The Assessing Officer shall serve a notice on such person requiring him to furnish within such time, not being less than 15 days, as may be specified in the notice, a return in the prescribed form and verified in the same manner as a return under clause (i) of sub-section

RAMAKANT SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 264/Jp/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Ramakant Sharma, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. S/O- Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, 1 Ward-3(5), Vimal Kunaj, Vidyut Nagar, Behind Jaipur. Bharat Petrol Pump, Jaipur. Pan No.: Bjrps 5130 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv) & Shri Satish Gupta (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/12/2020 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 05/12/2016 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. Lower Authorities Grossly Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. A.O. Grossly Erred In Resuming Jurisdiction Without Serving Notice U/S 148 On The Appellant Assessee As Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Not Served On The Appellant.

e) Procedure for making block assessment: (i) The Assessing Officer shall serve a notice on such person requiring him to furnish within such time, not being less than 15 days, as may be specified in the notice, a return in the prescribed form and verified in the same manner as a return under clause (i) of sub-section

SHRI SHRAVAN CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. 3. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, modify or amend any ground on or before the date of hearing.” Ground No. 1 and 1.1 are regarding validity of initiation of reassessment proceedings under section 147/148 of the IT Act. 2. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has challenged the initiation of proceedings

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)

22 ITR (Trib.) 609, had considered the issue. The Mumbai bench after considering the relevant sections and CBDT circular has held as under: "18. A perusal of Section 153A shows that it starts with a non obstante clause relating to normal assessment procedure which is covered by Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 in respect of searches made

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

22 ITR (Trib.) 609, had considered the issue. The Mumbai bench after considering the relevant sections and CBDT circular has held as under: "18. A perusal of Section 153A shows that it starts with a non obstante clause relating to normal assessment procedure which is covered by Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 in respect of searches made

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)

22 ITR (Trib.) 609, had considered the issue. The Mumbai bench after considering the relevant sections and CBDT circular has held as under: "18. A perusal of Section 153A shows that it starts with a non obstante clause relating to normal assessment procedure which is covered by Sections 139, 147, 148, 149, 151 and 153 in respect of searches made

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to section 153A(1) provides only for the abatement

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)

e-filed his return of income on 06.09.2012 declaring total income of Rs. 28,100/-. Kedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur The case was completed u/s 143(3) on 27.03.2014 at income of Rs. 28,100/-. Later, based on information available on record notice u/s 148 was issued on 26.03.2019 after recording reasons to believe that income has escaped

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

2,18,50,444/- 2. Enhancement by the ld. CIT(A) 4,69,22,650/- 4,69,22,650/- 1. 1. The main source of receipts/income of the assessee is annual fees from its members, rent, interest and Misc. receipts. In the present case the ld. AO has issued the notice u/s 148 on dt. 28.02.2018(PB38)on the reasons

PRAMOD KUMAR CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment u/s 147 of the Act. Therefore, it becomes mandatory\nupon the Revenue to ensure the service of notice u/s 143(2) of the Act even in the\nassessment framed under section 147 of the Act. In support of this, we rely on the\nfollowing judgements:\n> Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Lally Jacob

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to Smt. Jaya Prem Bhatia, Kota. section 153A(1) provides only

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

147 and other related sections. Thus, the assessment u/s 153A are not de novo assessments since the purpose of making the reassessments under section 153A is subject to tax, the hitherto undisclosed income unearthed during the course of the search. It is for this reason that the second proviso to Smt. Jaya Prem Bhatia, Kota. section 153A(1) provides only

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)

147 and other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee.” In view of above, notice issued u/s 148 without serving the notice and the consequential assessment order passed by non jurisdictional AO be quashed. Ground No.2 The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.5,26,000/- u/s

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

The appeal stands allowed

147 and other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee.” In view of above, notice issued u/s 148 without serving the notice and the consequential assessment order passed by non jurisdictional AO be quashed. Ground No.2 The Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in confirming the addition of Rs.5,26,000/- u/s

SAVITA GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO, DELHI

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

E-13, Landmark City, Kota (purchased by the appellant) was Rs. 30,15,000/-, whereas the consideration recorded in the seller’s books and paid by the appellant was Rs. 16,20,000/-. Relying solely on this document, the Ld. AO reopened the assessment under section 147 on 28.04.2020 and passed an order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144/144B. 2. The critical