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

section 153A of the Act. Thus the said judgment is inapplicable under the facts of the present case. Another judgment cited by ld. D/R is in the case of Harshvardhan Johari vs. DCIT (2020) 118 taxmann.com 449 (Jaipur-Trib) wherein it was held that the notice under section 143(2) of the Act was not issued though the time

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

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

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S N. M. AGROFOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

price is considered and rejected as the assessee has issued shares of Rs. 10 face value at a premium of Rs. 190 which by no stretch of imagination appears to be reasonable. iii. The assessee cannot at any time answer the fact that with such financial credentials how can a company or individual Invest such high share application money without

M/S. JAMMU METALLIC OXIDES PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. JAMMU METALLIC OXIDES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. JAMMU METALLIC OXIDES PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. TIRUPATI BALAJI ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED., KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. TIRUPATI BALAJI ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED., KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

M/S. TIRUPATI BALAJI ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

M/S. EDILA BUSINESS WORLD PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already

M/S. EDILA BUSINESS WORLD PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

transferred to income in a phased manner. This was not done by manipulating the account books of the Assessee as alleged by the Revenue. This would have been evident had the return been picked up for scrutiny under Section 143(3) of the Act. This, therefore, was not material which was subsequently unearthed during the search which was not already