INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

2 to 4. It is submitted that during the course of original assessment proceedings the learned AO examined the Books of account including cash book, bank account, stock register and transaction of purchase and sales, and it is after examining the case thoroughly that assessment was completed on returned income. (B) Proceeding under section 148A/148 In this case the learned

SHRI PRAKASH CHAND KOTHARI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A of the Act. 40. In the instant case, the fact that the Assessing officer has not invoked the provisions of section 153C, it shows that there was no satisfaction which has been recorded by the Assessing officer having jurisdiction over Ramesh Maniar Group that

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND KOTHARI, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassess the income of the other person in accordance with the provisions of section 153A of the Act. 40. In the instant case, the fact that the Assessing officer has not invoked the provisions of section 153C, it shows that there was no satisfaction which has been recorded by the Assessing officer having jurisdiction over Ramesh Maniar Group that

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

147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act without appreciating true and correct facts of the case and documentary evidences brought on record by the assessee Our submissions:- At the outset, your humble appellant would like to bring your kind attention that notice issued u/s. 148 (PB Page 78)of the Act in our case was Time-barred and passed after

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

SHRI SALASAR BALAJI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 148 for re opening of the case\nis hereby held as devoid of any merit and is therefore rejected. The then AO was believed that there\nwas escapement of income amounting to Rs.1,65,00,440/- on account of accommodation entries from\nBanka Group. /-. Issue regarding issue of shares on premium & transaction made with M/s Alves\nSecurities

PRADEEP KUMAR,JHUJHUNU vs. ITO WARD -2, JHUJHUNU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

220 (P&H) and Travancore Cements Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 219 CTR (Ker) 359 : (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker) held no longer good law. The heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped assessment". Sec. 148 is supplementary and complimentary to s. 147. Sub-s. (2

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SILVERTOSS COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed

section 153A of the Act. Thus the said judgment is inapplicable under the facts of the present case. Another judgment cited by ld. D/R is in the case of Harshvardhan Johari vs. DCIT (2020) 118 taxmann.com 449 (Jaipur-Trib) wherein it was held that the notice under section 143(2) of the Act was not issued though the time

PADAM CHAND DHADDA HUF,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

reassessment u/s 147 and 148 of the Act, it may inform the AO of its decision and in that event, the earlier return 5 ITA No. 40/JP/2017. M/s Padam Chand Dhadda HUF, Jaipur. will be treated as the fresh return submitted in response to notice issued u/s 148 of the Act. (iv) It may be mentioned that in the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

u/s 143(3) of Prem\nKunj Commosales P Ltd for AY 2014-15 dated\n07.12.2016\n146-\n152\n25. Copy of assessment order u/s 143(3) of\nPanchkoti Wholeseller P Ltd for AY 2014-15 dated\n13.12.2016\n153-\n159\n26. Copy of assessment order u/s 143(3) of Night\nBird Barter P Ltd for AY 2014-15 dated\n21.11.2016\n160-\n165

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

220 (P&H) and Travancore Cements Ltd.\nvs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 219 CTR (Ker) 359 : (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker) held no\nlonger good law.\nThe heading of s.147 is \"Income escaping assessment\" and that of s.148 \"Issue\nof notice where income escaped assessment\". Sec. 148 is supplementary and\ncomplimentary to s.147. Sub-s. (2) of s.148 mandates reasons

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

220 (P&H) and Travancore Cements Ltd.\nvs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 219 CTR (Ker) 359 : (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker) held no\nlonger good law.\nThe heading of s.147 is \"Income escaping assessment\" and that of s.148 \"Issue\nof notice where income escaped assessment\". Sec. 148 is supplementary and\ncomplimentary to s.147. Sub-s. (2) of s.148 mandates reasons

DCIT, CC-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S. DANGAYACH HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

220 wherein the earlier decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of V. C. Shukla’s case has been discussed at length and relying on the said decision, the ld. CIT(A) stated that though these judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court were rendered in the context of criminal law, yet what the Hon’ble Supreme Court held

BRAND INDIA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s\n143(3) r.w.s.147 –Re-assessment proceedings were initiated on basis of information received\nfrom Directorate of Income-tax (Investigation) without recording AO'S own satisfaction and\ninformation was accepted in mechanical manner—After reopening of assessment u/s 147, AO\nmade addition of Rs.40 lakhs received by assessee from various corporate entities-Addition\nwas made by AO on account

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJENDRA KUMAR JAIN, JAIPUR

u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in reopening the assessment of the assessee when there is no relation with the alleged land transaction of the assessee. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJENDRA KUMAR JAIN, JAIPUR

u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in reopening the assessment of the assessee when there is no relation with the alleged land transaction of the assessee. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred

RAJENDRA KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in reopening the assessment of the assessee when there is no relation with the alleged land transaction of the assessee. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred

RAJENDRA KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

u/s 147/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred in reopening the assessment of the assessee when there is no relation with the alleged land transaction of the assessee. 3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer has erred