SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

255 (Rajasthan)[19-03-2024]\nhas decided the issue as under (headnote reproduced):\nSection 153C, read with sections 148 and 153C, of the Income-tax Act, 1961\nSearch and seizure - Assessment of any other person (Section 153C vis-a-vis\nsection 148) Assessment year 2014-15 Whether on satisfaction of twin\ncondition for proceedings under section 153C, Assessing Officer

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

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)

255 ITR 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

M/S ANGEL INFRASTRUCTURE (P) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

255. (v) Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-tax. 7. On the other hand, the ld CIT-DR has submitted that the enquiry conducted by the DDIT(Inv), Faridabad reveals the fact that the alleged transaction of application money and transfer of the property between the related parties are only accommodation entries to create artificial loss

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ANGEL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the

255. (v) Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-tax. 7. On the other hand, the ld CIT-DR has submitted that the enquiry conducted by the DDIT(Inv), Faridabad reveals the fact that the alleged transaction of application money and transfer of the property between the related parties are only accommodation entries to create artificial loss

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

section 36(1)(va). No substantial question of law arises out of the\nimpugned orders of the ITAT. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M-s\nState Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.177-2011);\nCommissioner of Income Tax vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. (D.B.\nIncome Tax Appeal No.189-2011), followed.\"\n4.2.4The Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench has also followed

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

255 (Rajasthan)[19-03- 2024] As per the legal position if in the case of completed/unabated category of case the additions in the assessment order has only been made on the basis of material found and seized from the search action on the other assessee in that case the learned AO should have initiated the proceedings under section 153C

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

147 has not clothed AO with\nsuch jurisdiction therefore the action could not be upheld in the background of\nfacts of instant case. One more redeeming fact which had direct nexus with the\nsubsequent re-assessment proceedings and ramification of the same had\nculminated into re-assessment orders was the impugned order where\nAO rejected the objections submitted by Assessees

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

147 has not clothed AO with\nsuch jurisdiction therefore the action could not be upheld in the background of\nfacts of instant case. One more redeeming fact which had direct nexus with the\nsubsequent re-assessment proceedings and ramification of the same had\nculminated into re-assessment orders was the impugned order where\nAO rejected the objections submitted by Assessees

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

147 rws 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 04.12.2019 as well\nas the notice u/s 148 and action or proceedings u/s 147/148 are illegal, bad in law, barred\nby limitation, without jurisdiction, without approval/satisfaction from the proper or\ncompetent authority, against the principle of natural justice and various other reasons or\nand further contrary to the real facts

M/S. MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

255 Taxman 152 (SC) • PCIT Vs. Tupperware India Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 127 DTR 161 (Del.) 6. It was further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the validity of reopening of reassessment by referring to clause (c) of Explanation 2 to section 147 according to which computation of excessive depreciation allowance is deemed to be a case where income

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)

255 ITR 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

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAILASH CHAND HIRAWAT , JAIPUR

Appeal is hereby dismissed as having become infructuous

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, AM& SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 1175/JPR/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, बनाम Sh. Kailash Chand Hirawat Central Circle-4, VS. 9, Narain Singh Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAKPH9224R निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Rohan Sogani, C.A. राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by: Shri Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR, Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR सुनवाई क

147 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act. Assessment Order 2. Vide assessment order dated 08.12.2018, the Assessing Officer made two additions i.e. one to the tune of Rs. 3,61,00,000/-, and other to the tune of Rs. 17,93,000/-. 3. In brief, it may be mentioned here that case of the assessee was reopened and notice u/s

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

147 rws 144B of the 2 DCIT vs. Sunder Das Sonkiya Income Tax Act, by ITO, Ward 1 (2) and the National Faceless Assessment Unit respectively. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure of dispute. Thus, these appeals were heard together with the agreement

JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(OSD), CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, AMBEDKAR CIRCLE vs. SIDDHARTHA TOTUKA, C-SCHEME

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

147 of the Act challenged before the Hon’ble High Court, assessee succeeded. Hon’ble Court held that since the reassessment proceedings has been carried out based on the material gathered during the course of search, the Ld. AO ought to have initiated the proceedings u/s 153C of the Act relevant for the persons “other than the searched persons

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

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

147, 148, 149, 151 & 153.\n28. The language of explanation 2 to new Section 148 is akin to Section 153A and\nSection 153C. Corollary being that after seizing of operational period of Section 153A to\n153D, the cases being dealt thereunder were circumscribed in the scope of newly\nsubstituted Section 148.\n29. The Department has not set up a case