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)

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2007-08. Identical grounds have been raised in all these appeals. Therefore, we decide all these appeals by this combined order for the sake of convenience. We first take up the appeal in ITA No. 238/JP/2020 as lead case and the decision arrived at will be applicable

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

250 of ld. CIT (Appeals), dated 04.01.2024, appealed against\nOrder u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) dated 31.10.2019\n51\n65\n64\n75\n5\nReason recorded by the ld. AO for re-opening of assessment u/s 147\n76\n76\n6\nOrder u/s 143(3) dated 30.07.2016\n77\n84\n7\nSubmission by assessee dated 28.06.2016 to the respondent during\n85\n86\nassessment proceedings

DINESSH KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD4(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee\nhas raised the following grounds of appeal :-\n\n“1. That the ld. Assessing Officer grossly erred in reopening assessment under section\n147 of the Act merely on the basis of borrowed satisfaction.\n2. That the ld. Assessing Officer is not justified making addition amounting

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

reassessment under Sections 139,147,148,149,151 & 153. " In view of the above discussion, the assessment completed u/s 144 deserves to be quashed. The order of the Learned CIT(A) also deserved to be quashed on this ground. Additional Ground No.2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14 to\n16-17.\n2. The grounds raised by the assessee are common in all the appeals except\nchange in figures, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised in ITA No.\n243/JPR/2025 for the assessment year 2013-14 are being reproduced hereunder :-\nITA No. 243 To 246/JPR/2025

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14 to\n16-17.\n2. The grounds raised by the assessee are common in all the appeals except\nchange in figures, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised in ITA No.\n243/JPR/2025 for the assessment year 2013-14 are being reproduced hereunder :-\n\nITA No. 243 Το

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14 to\n16-17.\n2. The grounds raised by the assessee are common in all the appeals except\nchange in figures, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised in ITA No.\n243/JPR/2025 for the assessment year 2013-14 are being reproduced hereunder :-\nITA No. 243 Το 246/JPR/2025

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14 to\n16-17.\n2. The grounds raised by the assessee are common in all the appeals except\nchange in figures, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised in ITA No.\n243/JPR/2025 for the assessment year 2013-14 are being reproduced hereunder :-\nITA No. 243 To 246/JPR/2025

SUSHILA DEVI JANGID,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 7(2), JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 374/JP/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2010-11 Smt. Sushila Devi Jangid 65, Koshaliya Vihar Hajyawala,Muhana Mandi Ke Pass, Sanganer, Jaipur 302 029 बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward 7(2) Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFMPJ 2091 P निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Utkarsh Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by :Shri Gautam Sing

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 for A.Y 2010-11 resulted in the Best Judgement Assessment of the assessee and an Order under Section 147 r.w.s 144 of the Act was issued upon the assessee on 24.12.2017 [PB 1 - 6]. This Order resulted in a demand of Rs. 10,98,750/- on account of alleged unexplained Short-term Capital Gain

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)

250 (Mysore), the High Court of Mysore was dealing with the case where the notice under section 148 of the Act was issued in the names of the assessee who were minors and not in the names of their guardians. The notices were served on a clerk of the father of the assessee who was neither an agent

PRAMOD KUMAR CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

250 of the Act that date and place\nof hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the\nAssessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by\nappearing in person or through authorised representative Despite fixing the case for\nseventeen hearings, no one had put in appearance nor any justifiable reason

LATE SHRI JITENDRA NAGAR THROUGH HIS L/R SMT. DEEPIKA NAGAR,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD BARAN, BARAN

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2016-17. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. That in law and facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. Assessing officer grossly erred in passing the ex-parte assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s 144B of the Act. 2 Late Shri Jitendra Nagar through

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment\norder so passed deserves to be held bad in law.”\n\n2.2 As regards admission of additional ground so taken by assessee is\nconcerned, the ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that though legal\nground against order passed u/s 147 has been taken requesting it to\nconsider as bad in law, however, for the sake of clarity, additional

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 148 be upheld as valid\nand in accordance with the law.\n2. The addition of ₹44,62,938/- under Section 2(22)(e) be upheld, as the\nAppellant has failed to disprove the findings of the AO.\n3.\nThe appeal of the Appellant be dismissed, and the order of the Ld. CIT(A)\nbe upheld

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

u/s 148 was not\nserved by the AO who passed the order and consequential by the order of\nassessment lacks jurisdiction. Ld. DR has not disputed the primary facts Ld.\nAR has relied upon the decision of our Hon'ble High Court in\nthe case of Mrs. ShubhashriPanickerVs. CIT (2018) 166 DTR 1 (Raj.) (HC)\nwherein it was held

KOSHAL KISHOR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT(INTL. TAX.) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 07.03.2025 and 12.02.2025 arise from the orders dated 24.05.2023 and 29.03.2024 passed by DCIT Circle (Intl. Tax), Jaipur under section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- Koshal Kishor Sharma

KOSHAL KISHOR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT(INTL. TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 07.03.2025 and 12.02.2025 arise from the orders dated 24.05.2023 and 29.03.2024 passed by DCIT Circle (Intl. Tax), Jaipur under section 147 r.w.s. 144 and 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 respectively for the assessment year 2015-16. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- Koshal Kishor Sharma