RAMAKANT SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 264/Jp/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Ramakant Sharma, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. S/O- Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, 1 Ward-3(5), Vimal Kunaj, Vidyut Nagar, Behind Jaipur. Bharat Petrol Pump, Jaipur. Pan No.: Bjrps 5130 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv) & Shri Satish Gupta (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/12/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 05/12/2016 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. Lower Authorities Grossly Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. A.O. Grossly Erred In Resuming Jurisdiction Without Serving Notice U/S 148 On The Appellant Assessee As Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Not Served On The Appellant.

147 of the Act. 2. On the facts & circumstances of the case and in law also ld. A.O. grossly erred in resuming jurisdiction without serving notice u/s 148 on the appellant assessee as notice issued u/s 148 was not served on the appellant. 2 ITA 264/JP/2017_ Ramakant Sharma Vs ITO 3. On the facts & circumstances of the case

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI VIMAL CHAND SURANA(HUF), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

u/s 153C of the Act. For ready reference we quote section 153C as under:- “ 153C. 79[(1)] 80[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, 81belongs

MAHENDRA SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(2) prior of finalizing re-assessment order\ncould not be condoned by referring to Sec. 292BB and is fatal to the order of re-\nassessment-Re-assessment was not sustainable in law.\n\n1.13 ALOK MITTAL V/S DCIT (2008) 162 DTR 13 (Kol.) (Trib.) Sec 147,\n292BAssessment made by the AO u/s 147 without issuance of statutory notice

M/S. RAJDHANI CRAFTS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4 JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

5 ITA 1281/JP/2019 M/s Rajdhani Crafts Vs ACIT response to notice issued U/s 148 of the Act declaring NIL income which is duly recorded by the A.O. in para 2 of the assessment order. The A.O. further stated that in response to notice U/s 143(2)/142(1) of the Act, the ld. AR of the assessee attended and furnished

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)

u/s 153C of the Act. For ready reference we quote section 153C as under:- “ 153C. 79[(1)] 80[Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147, section 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, where the Assessing Officer is satisfied that,— (a) any money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing, seized or requisitioned, 81belongs

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

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

u/s 147 r.w.s 148? Ground No. 1 Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in quashing the reopening and reassessment under Section 147 of the Act ignoring that the case was reopened as per clause (c) of Explanation 2 to Section 147 and with the Kedia Builders and Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

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

reassessment\nproceedings under section 147 read with section 148 of the Act cannot be initiated\nmerely based on the audit report. An audit is principally intended for the purpose of\nsatisfying the auditor with regard to the sufficiency of rules and procedures\nprescribed for the purpose of securing an effective check on the assessment,\ncollection and proper allocation of revenue

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

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

147 of the Act was not valid and the same is\nquashed. The appeal on Ground No 1 to 1.3 are thus allowed.\n1. In view of the above decision on Ground No 1 to 1.3, appeal on Ground No 2 to\n2.4, 3, 4 and 5 have become infructuous and no further adjudication is required on\nmerits

PRAMOD KUMAR CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

5.\n4.\nA perusal of the assessment order itself shows that the appellant had filed\nincome tax return u/s 139 of the Act. In this regard, attention is invited to the\nopening paragraph, at page 2, of the assessment order wherein the Ld. AO himself\nnoted that the return of income was filed, u/s

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

reassessment under Section 147, 148 & 148A of the Act in a faceless manner. Proceedings under Section 147 and Section 148 of the Act would now have to be taken as per the 34 ITA No. 656/JP/2023 & CO No. 06/JP/2023 ITO vs. Mukesh Kumar Soni procedure legislated by the Parliament in respect of reopening/ re-assessment i.e., proceedings under Section 148A

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

section 147\nThe 2nd last para of the 1st page of the Jurisdictional AO's report is a para numbered (i),\nwhich deals with the limitation aspect, does not anywhere contradicts the proviso to\nsection 147 that restricts the ld. AO to take action u/s 147 after a lapse of four years if the\nassessment u/s 143(3) has earlier

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

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

147 of the Act was not valid and the same is\nquashed. The appeal on Ground No 1 to 1.3 are thus allowed.\n\n1. In view of the above decision on Ground No 1 to 1.3, appeal on Ground No 2 to\n2.4, 3, 4 and 5 have become infructuous and no further adjudication is required on\nmerits

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

147 of the Act was not valid and the same is\nquashed. The appeal on Ground No 1 to 1.3 are thus allowed.\n1. In view of the above decision on Ground No 1 to 1.3, appeal on Ground No 2 to\n2.4, 3, 4 and 5 have become infructuous and no further adjudication is required on\nmerits

SHRI GOVIND NARAIN JOHARI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Although The Second Round Of Assessment Was Completed At The Directions Of Hon’Ble Itat.

147/- out of interest and bank charges without considering the submissions made and evidences adduced before him, thus disallowance so made needs to deleted. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in confirming the disallowance made ld. AO of Rs. 22,47,127/- on account of interest paid on loan taken

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

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

5% of Rs.40,15,061.29) towards alleged\nundisclosed expenditure under Section 69C on account of commission\npurportedly paid to obtain such capital gains.\n\nIV.\nAggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jaipur–4 “CIT(A)”. The appeal was allowed vide\norder dated 31.12.2024. The Id. CIT(A) deleted

SAVITA GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO, DELHI

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

2 to new Section 148 is akin to Section 153A and Section 153C. Corollary being that after seizing of operational period of Section 153A to 153D, the cases being dealt thereunder were circumscribed in the scope of newly substituted Section 148. 29. The Department has not set up a case that for initiating proceedings under Section 148 it had material

SH. KAPIL TANEJA,JAIPUR vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

sections of 153C of the Act and therefore consequential order passed u/s 147 of the Act is bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 1.4. That, the Ld. CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the action of ld. AO in reopening the assessment, beyond the specified time line. Thus, the reassessment proceedings initiated is time barred and entire

DIPTI GARG,TONK vs. ITO WD, TONK

reassessment proceedings. Thus, the legal issue raised in\nground nos. 1 and 2 are hereby dismissed.\n7. Now coming to the merits of the case raised in the ground nos. 3\nand 4, the grievance of the assessee is against the finding of the Ld.\nCIT(A) confirming the addition made by the AO u/s. 56(2)(viib

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. USHA BANKA, SIKAR

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

u/s 153A cannot be sustained\nand is hereby deleted as the same is without basis of incriminating material\nunearthed during the search action on the appellant and impugned addition could\nhave been done by the learned assessing officer in re-assessment proceedings by\nissuance of notice under section 147/148. The Id. AO is directed to take necessary\naction in this