INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

reassessment proceedings, the AO vide order dt.\n25.11.2019 disposing the objections raised, stating that the assessment u/s 143(3)\nof the Act is completed on 28.03.2016 and notice issued on 18.03.2019 which is\nwithin four years from the end of the relevant year in which assessment is\ncompleted. Therefore, the AO wrongly has changed the time limit from 'four years

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

reassessment proceedings, the AO vide order dt.\n25.11.2019 disposing the objections raised, stating that the assessment u/s 143(3)\nof the Act is completed on 28.03.2016 and notice issued on 18.03.2019 which is\nwithin four years from the end of the relevant year in which assessment is\ncompleted. Therefore, the AO wrongly has changed the time limit from 'four years

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, 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. 59/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Vijay Kumar Agarwal, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. 7/58, Vidhyadhar Nagar, Ward 4(2), Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Advpa 6150 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Pravin Kr. Saraswat (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 24/05/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A), Ajmer Dated 27/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Learned C.I.T. (A) Has Erred For Not Considering The Issue For Validity Of Issue Notice U/S 148 Of I.T. Act, 1961, While There Was No Escapement Of Income On Part Of Assessee. The Initiation Of Proceedings Was Only On Behest Of I.T.O. Ward 3(2), Who Has Intimated To A.O. For Advancement Of Loan Rs.53,95,000/- Given By Assessee To Pooja Agarwal, While Concern A.O. Has Accepted Said Loan In Her Hands After Detailed Examination. Hence Initiation Of 2

239 (SC)]. 1.2.4 Heart of the Section 147 is the formation of belief by the Assessing Officer that income has escaped assessment. The reasons so recorded have to be based on some tangible material and that should be evident from reading the reasons. This is the bare minimum mandatory requirement of the first part of Section 147

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s 147

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\n\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s 147

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassessment process invalid in law. The AO's\naction in initiating proceedings u/s 147 is based on conjecture and suspicion, and falls\nfoul of the binding legal principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various\nHigh Courts.\nIn light of the above legal and factual position, it is respectfully submitted that the\nreassessment proceedings-initiated u/s 147

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

u/s 139(1),\r\nwhich is illegal and now it is the settled legal position of law that if no addition on\r\nthe reasons recorded has been made then no other addition can be made, for\r\nthis kindly refer following decisions:\r\n(a) In the case of CIT vs. Shri Ram Singh306

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)

147 regarding assessment or reassessment of escaped income, he would keep on making roving inquiry and thereby including different items of income not connected or related with the reasons to believe, on the basis of which he assumed jurisdiction. For every new issue coming before AO during the course of proceedings of assessment or reassessment of escaped income, and which

JAI DEEP SINGH,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

147, he is free to record the reasons for the belief and proceed to make the reassessment. Thus, the appellant’s arguments being devoid of merits are rejected and keeping in view the provisions of section 292B of the Act and various judicial pronouncements discussed (supra), the validity of notice issued u/s 148 of the Act is upheld. 4.3.6 Further

ACIT, NCR BUILDING, JAIPUR vs. HANS RAJ AGARWAL, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR JAIPUR

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

u/s 142(1) of the Act vide its reply dated 07/10/2018 submitted before the AO that the Appellant was allotted Four Lakh Shares of Anax Com Trade Limited in the year 2012 which was de materialized in DP of Alankit Assignment Limited on 11/04/2013. Further, it was submitted that the shares of Anax Com Trade Limited were split into Re.1

PINCITY JEWLHOUSE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, CC, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the date of hearing." 3. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 58 days in filing of the present appeal by the assessee for which the Id. AR of 3

reassess the earlier assessment in terms of section 147 or carry out rectification u/s 154 of the Act. He can’t usurp the power of the CIT and recommend a revision. No overlapping of powers of the authorities under the Act can be permitted. As the revision proceedings in this case have triggered with the AO sending a proposal

RAMA SHANKER PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 by AO by issuing notice u/s 148 was without\nauthority of law and could not be sustained.\n2. No addition made on the reasons recorded u/s 148: As the ld. AO issued the\nnotice u/s 148 on the reasons recorded as per assessment order that “Information\nhas been received from the IT(Hq) his vide letter No.657 dated

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

u/s 10(23C)(iiiad), which is illegal and now it is\nthe settled legal position of law that if no addition on the reasons recorded has\nbeen made then no other addition or disallowance or denial of exemption or\nclaim or deduction can be made, for this kindly refer following decisions:\n(a) In the case of CIT vs. Shri

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

u/s 10(23C)(iiiad), which is illegal and now it is\nthe settled legal position of law that if no addition on the reasons recorded has\nbeen made then no other addition or disallowance or denial of exemption or\nclaim or deduction can be made, for this kindly refer following decisions:\n(a) In the case of CIT vs. Shri

MAYA KUMARI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 69 for payment of losses., which is illegal and now it is the settled legal\nposition of law that if no addition on the reasons recorded has been made then no other\naddition can be made, for this kindly refer following decisions:\n(a) In the case of CIT vs. Shri Ram Singh306

MO. SHARIPH KURESHI,SIKAR vs. ITO WARD-4 SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section even though said issue did not find mention in the reasons recorded and the notice issued under s. 148. Since there was confusion prevailing with regard to the powers of the AO to assess or reassess on the issues for which no reasons were recorded, Expln. 3 came to be inserted as 7 Mo. Shariph Kureshi, Sikar. clarificatory

VIJIT SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Reassessment proceedings and notice being bad in law\nwere quashed-Assessee's appeal allowed.\nAlso refer a recent judgment of this Honble ITAT in the case of Sh. Anshuman\nSingh v/s ACIT Circle-1 Jaipur in ITA No.733 & 739/JP/2023 dt.10.04.2024.\nTherefore the notice, reasons recorded, assessment all are the illegal bad void\nab-initio and barred by limitation and liable