KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

6) of section\n159.\nAs per provisions of section 189(3) all the legal heirs of the deceased partner(s) are jointly and\nseverally liable for any tax, penalty or other sum payable under Income tax Act, 1961 but for\naffixing such liability all the legal heir must be served with notice(s) and all the them must be\nmade

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

6) of section\n159.\nAs per provisions of section 189(3) all the legal heirs of the deceased partner(s) are jointly and\nseverally liable for any tax, penalty or other sum payable under Income tax Act, 1961 but for\naffixing such liability all the legal heir must be served with notice(s) and all the them must be\nmade

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

6) of section\n159.\nAs per provisions of section 189(3) all the legal heirs of the deceased partner(s) are jointly and\nseverally liable for any tax, penalty or other sum payable under Income tax Act, 1961 but for\naffixing such liability all the legal heir must be served with notice(s) and all the them must be\nmade

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

6) of section\n159.\nAs per provisions of section 189(3) all the legal heirs of the deceased partner(s) are jointly and\nseverally liable for any tax, penalty or other sum payable under Income tax Act, 1961 but for\naffixing such liability all the legal heir must be served with notice(s) and all the them must be\nmade

AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AJMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION)/ ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR / JODHPUR

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

reassessment has been made under section 143(3) read with section 147 - Held, yes Fact: For the relevant assessment year, the assessee's original order of assessment under section 143(3) dated 27-12-2006 was sought to be reopened on 6

HEERA LAL KASARA,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honours.”

reassessment proceedings initiated under section 147 of the Act. The objections of the assessee were duly disposed off by the AO vide his letter dated 15.12.2016.Thereafter, the AO issued show cause notice asking the assessee to show cause as to why the undisclosed GP of Rs. 47,79,046/- should not be treated as income from undisclosed sources vide letter

LALIT JOHARI,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad40/Jodh/2019 (Assessment Year- 2014-15) Vs The Acit Shri Lalit Johri 65-A, Bank Colony, Rai Central Circle-2 Ka Bagh, Jodhpur Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Agfpj 5542 H

147, section 148, section 1549, section 151 and section 153 in the case of a person where a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other documents or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st day of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall – (a) Issue notice to such person requiring him to furnish within

SHAHNAJ,NEAR BHERUDANJI WELL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, INCOME TAX OFFICE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Dr Mitha Lal Meenasmt. Shanaj Vs The Ito W/O Shri Aslam Khan Ward-2, Churu, Near Bherudan Ji Well,Ward No. 22 Churu Sardarshahar,Churu – 331 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Fpmps 3570 D

reassessment proceeding U/s 147 of the Act without obtaining proper satisfaction and sanction from the superior authority U/s 151 of the Act. I have carefully considered the facts and submissions of the Learned AR and the decisions relied on by him. This is 3 SMT SHAHNAJ VS ITO, WARD-2, CHURU the case where originally the appellant had not filed

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

reassessment order, the assessee challenged the same before the CIT(A). The CIT(A), after considering the facts and submissions, upheld the reopening and sustained the additions. The assessee is now in appeal before us. 5. The core grievance of the assessee pertains to the legality of the reopening of the assessment and the additions made under section

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

reassessment order, the assessee challenged the same before the CIT(A). The CIT(A), after considering the facts and submissions, upheld the reopening and sustained the additions. The assessee is now in appeal before us. 5. The core grievance of the assessee pertains to the legality of the reopening of the assessment and the additions made under section

PARASMAL SAREMAL GOGAD,PALI vs. ITO, , PALI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

6) Guard File\nSd\n(DRAMITHA LAL MEENA)\nACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nBy Oder\nAssistant Registrar,\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal,\nJodhpur Bench,\nJodhpur.", "summary": {"facts": "The assessee's original return declared an income of Rs. 4,61,380/-. An assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A was completed at Rs. 4,61,380/-. Subsequently, reassessment proceedings u/s 147 were initiated based on search

PREETI SINGHVI L/H SHRI AJAY SINGHVI,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

reassessment proceedings only after properly after properly appreciating and analyzing the evidences. The information on the foundation of which Assessing Officer had initiated proceedings under section 147, was certain and constitutes sufficient and relevant material on the basis of which a reasonable person could have formed a belief that income of the appellant company had escaped assessment on account

MURLIDHAR KRIPLANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Completing The Assessment Of Income Which Is Mandatory In Sh. Murlidhar Kriplani Vs. Ito Nature. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Also Confirmed That Where Return Of Income Filed Beyond Time As Contemplated Under Section 139, It Is Not Necessary On Part Of Ao To Issue Notice U/S 143(2) Which Is Bad In Law & Unjustified & Not Tenable As Per The Hon'Ble Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench In Case Of Ito Vs Kamla Devi Sharma In Db

6,04,660/- comprising of Rs. 1,77,438/- as income under business and Rs. 4,27,217/- under the head capital gains. Subsequently, the assessee was served with notice under section 148 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act dated 25/03/2015 the assessment was completed under section 148/143(3) vide order dated 09/12/2015. LEGAL POINTS CHALLENGED

DEEPAK KUMAR RAJORIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), BIKANER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Assessing Authority Tax Was Paid & Adjust From Tds The Appellant Was Aware Of The Fact That There Is Any Form By Filing Which The Penalty May Be Dropped So The Penalty Was Never Leviable In This Case Therefore The Penalty U/S 270A May Please Be Cancelled. 3. The Appellant Prays For Justice & Relief. 4. The Appellant May Please Be Permitted To Raise Any Addition Or Alternative Ground At Or Before The Hearing.”

reassessment under sub- section (3) of section 143 or section 147, as the case may be, has been paid within the period specified in such notice of demand; and (b) no appeal has been filed The application has to be made in form No. 68 within 30 days from the end of the month in which the order has been

RACHNA GOYAL,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

6 has mentioned that :\n6. Basis of forming reason to believe and details of escapement of Income : In\nview of the above facts, I have reason to believe that income of the assessee\namount of Rs. 745080/- in the form of capital gain arisen due to transaction of\npenny stock, has escaped assessment within the meaning of section 147

OCHHAB LAL JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

147 of the Act can be taken to\ntax the income which has escaped assessment or had remained to be taxed. There\ncan be situation where an item has been dealt with in the body of the order of\nassessment and the assessee be aggrieved from the addition or disallowances so\nmade, had preferred an appeal before the CIT against

OCHHAB LAL JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

147 of the Act can be taken to\ntax the income which has escaped assessment or had remained to be taxed. There\ncan be situation where an item has been dealt with in the body of the order of\nassessment and the assessee be aggrieved from the addition or disallowances so\nmade, had preferred an appeal before the CIT against

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

6. As the assessee has not received any relief from the order of the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has preferred the present appeal before this tribunal on the grounds as raised here in above. The ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee has placed their written submission which is extracted here in below; 1] As regards ground

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

6. As the assessee has not received any relief from the order of the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has preferred the present appeal before this tribunal on the grounds as raised here in above. The ld. AR appearing on behalf of the assessee has placed their written submission which is extracted here in below; 1] As regards ground