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)

151A, to impart greater efficiency, transparency and accountability by applying artificial intelligence, technological innovations, etc., but as of now, from a careful reading of the notification dated 29.03.2022, along with the statutory provisions, we find that the aforesaid notification does not cover a case where notice under Section 148 is issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) the information

RSD CONTAINERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That assessment made without providing the assessee the material on which addition has been made is against principles of natural justice and denies the assessee fair opportunity to put up his case. Non provision of information makes the assessment illegal. Assessee has been denied reasonable opportunity

SH. MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

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

151A of the Act and the same deserves to be quashed and set aside. Thus in view of above, it is noted that initiation of reassessment proceedings is not in accordance with law as notices u/s 148A and 148 as well as order u/s 148A(d) have been passed by JAO instead of FAO, which 19 SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL

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

151A and Notification S O 1466E dated 29.05.2022 the issuance of notice under section 148 in the case of assessee on 29.03.2022 by the jurisdictional Income Tax officer 1(2) Jaipur is ab- initio void. The Notification S O 1466E dated 29.03.2022 mentions that it shall come into force with the date of its publication i.e. 29.03.2022 whereas notice

RITU DHAKA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 4(4), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds: -

68 of the Act, therefore the Ld. A.O. did not follow the guidelines of CBDT mentioned in CBDT instruction No. 20/2015, dated 29.12.2015. The relevant Para of CBDT instruction is as follows:- “4. The Board further desires that in all cases under scrutiny, where the Assessing Officer proposes to make additions or disallowances, the assessee would be given a fair

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

151A – Whether after introduction\nof 'Faceless Jurisdiction of Income-tax Authorities Scheme, 2022' and 'e-\nAssessment of Income Escaping Assessment Scheme, 2022' it became\nmandatory for revenue to conduct/initiate proceedings pertaining to reassessment\nunder sections 147, 148 and 148A in a faceless manner Held, yes - Whether\nsince in instant case impugned proceedings under section 148A as well

DURGA PRASAD SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68 or 690. In the present case, the appellant's argument that sales were accepted and GST ITC was allowed to buyers does not alter the conclusion under the Income Tax Act. As held in CIT v. P. Mohankala (SC), the acceptance of accounting entries or tax credits in other statutory regimes does not suffice to prove genuineness under

RAGHAV COMMODITIES,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 151A. In this regard, a detailed report was called from the AO which is self- explanatory on all these issues and enclosed with this submission for your kind perusal. 2. It is also submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly upheld the addition of Rs. 8,90,52,650/- made by the AO on account of assesse

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

68 taxmann.com 298 (Kerala), the Kerala High Court held\r\nthat a return filed by assessee beyond period stipulated under section 139(1) or\r\n139(4) or under section 142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and acted\r\nupon for entertaining claim raised under section 80P provided further\r\nproceedings in relation

SUNIL CHABLANI,AJMER, RAJASTHAN vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

151A r.w.s 144B of the Act, mandating for the Id. AO to complete the proceeding in faceless manner only as against done manually and hence, the same deserves to be quashed. “10. The Id. AO further erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in imposing tax, surcharge, cess etc. as per provision of S.115BBE