DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

1) (b) provides for the assessment or reassessment of the total income of the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search took place. To repeat, there is no condition in this Section that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. RATAN KANWAR RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

section 153A of the Act is a better case scenario, where there is no such requirement in the Act. ACIT vs. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat & Ors Therefore, the finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will be applicable with more force in such cases. Thus, it is clear from the above discussion that there was incriminating material in this case

ACIT, CC-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MAHENDRA SINGH RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

section 153A of the Act is a better case scenario, where there is no such requirement in the Act. ACIT vs. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat & Ors Therefore, the finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will be applicable with more force in such cases. Thus, it is clear from the above discussion that there was incriminating material in this case

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. RATAN KANWAR RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

section 153A of the Act is a better case scenario, where there is no such requirement in the Act. ACIT vs. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat & Ors Therefore, the finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will be applicable with more force in such cases. Thus, it is clear from the above discussion that there was incriminating material in this case

ACIT, CC-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MAHENDRA SINGH RATNAWAT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and

section 153A of the Act is a better case scenario, where there is no such requirement in the Act. ACIT vs. Mahendra Singh Ratnawat & Ors Therefore, the finding of the Hon'ble Supreme Court will be applicable with more force in such cases. Thus, it is clear from the above discussion that there was incriminating material in this case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SILVERTOSS COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed

1) (b) provides for the assessment or reassessment of the total income of the six assessment years immediately preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which the search took place. To repeat, there is no condition in this Section that additions should be strictly made on the basis of evidence found in the course

POOJASHISH INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 is bad in law, void ab-initio, and deserves to be annulled as the assessment for the year under consideration was not abated as on the date of search

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Act. 2. All the appeals as well as the cross objections are being heard together and for the sake of convenience, a composite order is being passed. 3. The assessee is a group concern of Kota Dall Mill (KDM) group and subjected to the search and seizure action

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S KOTA DALL MILL, KOTA

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order passed u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 is bad in law, void ab-initio, and deserves to be annulled as the assessment for the year under consideration was not abated as on the date of search

M/S KOTA DALL MILL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the order passed u/s 153A read with section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961 is bad in law, void ab-initio, and deserves to be annulled as the assessment for the year under consideration was not abated as on the date of search