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

SHRI ARVIND KUMAR SENGWA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, AJMER

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment notice. The Hon’ble court thereafter, in para 4 considered the grounds of appeal urged by the revenue in support of the present appeal u/s 260A and finally in para 5 & 6 the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that no substantial question of law arose and hence the appeal of the revenue was dismissed on both

SMT. SAROJ DHAKA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(3), JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment notice. The Hon’ble court thereafter, in para 4 considered the grounds of appeal urged by the revenue in support of the present appeal u/s 260A and finally in para 5 & 6 the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that no substantial question of law arose and hence the appeal of the revenue was dismissed on both

SHRI KAILASH CHAND GEHLOT,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(3) JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment notice. The Hon’ble court thereafter, in para 4 considered the grounds of appeal urged by the revenue in support of the present appeal u/s 260A and finally in para 5 & 6 the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that no substantial question of law arose and hence the appeal of the revenue was dismissed on both

ASHA SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment notice. The Hon’ble court thereafter, in para 4 considered the grounds of appeal urged by the revenue in support of the present appeal u/s 260A and finally in para 5 & 6 the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that no substantial question of law arose and hence the appeal of the revenue was dismissed on both

SHRI SURESH KUMAR CHAWLA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD -6(3), JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment notice. The Hon’ble court thereafter, in para 4 considered the grounds of appeal urged by the revenue in support of the present appeal u/s 260A and finally in para 5 & 6 the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that no substantial question of law arose and hence the appeal of the revenue was dismissed on both

SHRI SHRINIVAS TRIPATHI,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AJMER

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment notice. The Hon’ble court thereafter, in para 4 considered the grounds of appeal urged by the revenue in support of the present appeal u/s 260A and finally in para 5 & 6 the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that no substantial question of law arose and hence the appeal of the revenue was dismissed on both

SHRI BHAGWATI PRASAD SHARMA,DAUSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, DAUSA

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassessment notice. The Hon’ble court thereafter, in para 4 considered the grounds of appeal urged by the revenue in support of the present appeal u/s 260A and finally in para 5 & 6 the Hon’ble Court was of the opinion that no substantial question of law arose and hence the appeal of the revenue was dismissed on both

RAVINDER SINGH THAKKAR,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMSSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that as is evident from table of notices issued as\nfurnished in preceding paras, no notice u/s 143(2) was issued by Id.AO during the\ncourse

RAVINDER SINGH THAKKAR,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that as is evident from table of notices issued as\nfurnished in preceding paras, no notice u/s 143(2) was issued by Id.AO during the\ncourse

RAVINDER SINGH THAKKAR,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that as is evident from table of notices issued as\nfurnished in preceding paras, no notice u/s 143(2) was issued by Id.AO during the\ncourse

RAVINDER SINGH THAKKAR,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that as is evident from table of notices issued as\nfurnished in preceding paras, no notice u/s 143(2) was issued by Id.AO during the\ncourse

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

147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section\n153, in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of\naccount, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the\n31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall-\n(a) issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish

RAVINDER SINGH THAKKAR,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

147 is bad in law and deserves to be quashed.\n2. Re Assessment for A.Y. 2015-16 completed without issuing notice_u/s\n143(2) of the Act\nIn this regard, it is submitted that as is evident from table of notices issued as\nfurnished in preceding paras, no notice u/s 143(2) was issued by Id.AO during the\ncourse

RADHAKISHNA BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment into two stages and when viewed in that light allocation. The distribution of functions between the JAO and NFAC is complimentary and concurrent as contemplated under the various schemes and the statutory provisions. This balanced distribution underscores the legislative intent to create a seamless integration of traditional and faceless assessment mechanisms within a unified statutory framework This

RADHAKISHAN BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment into two stages and when viewed in that light allocation. The distribution of functions between the JAO and NFAC is complimentary and concurrent as contemplated under the various schemes and the statutory provisions. This balanced distribution underscores the legislative intent to create a seamless integration of traditional and faceless assessment mechanisms within a unified statutory framework This

GANPATI PLAZA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, BEHROR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 2. On the facts & circumstances of the case & in law also A.O. grossly erred in passing the assessment order without proper & unlawful service of notice u/s 148,143(2) of the Act. 3. On the facts & circumstances of the case Ld CIT (A), Alwar grossly erred in holding that

ITO, BARAN vs. GANPATI PLAZA, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and appeal of the Revenue for the assessment year

reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 2. On the facts & circumstances of the case & in law also A.O. grossly erred in passing the assessment order without proper & unlawful service of notice u/s 148,143(2) of the Act. 3. On the facts & circumstances of the case Ld CIT (A), Alwar grossly erred in holding that