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

149(1)(b) read with\nsection 148(1) of the Act has been issued to the assessee is always on the\nRevenue.\n1.14 Though ld. CIT (A) was in agreement with the contention of the appellant that\nnotice was issued in the name of M/s. Kishriyaji Filling station, Rishabhdeo,\nwithout impleading legal representatives on it, but, still she tried

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

149(1)(b) read with\nsection 148(1) of the Act has been issued to the assessee is always on the\nRevenue.\n1.14 Though ld. CIT (A) was in agreement with the contention of the appellant that\nnotice was issued in the name of M/s. Kishriyaji Filling station, Rishabhdeo,\nwithout impleading legal representatives on it, but, still she tried

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

149(1)(b) read with\nsection 148(1) of the Act has been issued to the assessee is always on the\nRevenue.\n1.14 Though ld. CIT (A) was in agreement with the contention of the appellant that\nnotice was issued in the name of M/s. Kishriyaji Filling station, Rishabhdeo,\nwithout impleading legal representatives on it, but, still she tried

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

149(1)(b) read with\nsection 148(1) of the Act has been issued to the assessee is always on the\nRevenue.\n1.13 Though ld. CIT (A) was in agreement with the contention of the appellant that\nnotice was issued in the name of M/s. Kishriyaji Filling station, Rishabhdeo,\nwithout impleading legal representatives on it, but, still she tried

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

149(1)(b) read with\n1.13\nsection 148(1) of the Act has been issued to the assessee is always on the\nRevenue.\nThough ld. CIT (A) was in agreement with the contention of the appellant that\nnotice was issued in the name of M/s. Kishriyaji Filling station, Rishabhdeo,\nwithout impleading legal representatives on it, but, still she tried

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ACIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment proceeding was valid, it has only to be seen by the AO, whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the AO could re-open the case. Thus, the sufficiency of the correctness of the material is nothing to be considered as to this stage of the recording reasons for the reopening of the assessment

ACIT, CIRCLE, PALI. vs. M/S. RAJASTHAN MARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK, , JODHPUR

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment proceeding was valid, it has only to be seen by the AO, whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the AO could re-open the case. Thus, the sufficiency of the correctness of the material is nothing to be considered as to this stage of the recording reasons for the reopening of the assessment

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ACIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment proceeding was valid, it has only to be seen by the AO, whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the AO could re-open the case. Thus, the sufficiency of the correctness of the material is nothing to be considered as to this stage of the recording reasons for the reopening of the assessment

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ACIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment proceeding was valid, it has only to be seen by the AO, whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the AO could re-open the case. Thus, the sufficiency of the correctness of the material is nothing to be considered as to this stage of the recording reasons for the reopening of the assessment

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ADDITIONAL CIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment proceeding was valid, it has only to be seen by the AO, whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the AO could re-open the case. Thus, the sufficiency of the correctness of the material is nothing to be considered as to this stage of the recording reasons for the reopening of the assessment

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ADDITIONAL CIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

reassessment proceeding was valid, it has only to be seen by the AO, whether there is prima facie some material on the basis of which the AO could re-open the case. Thus, the sufficiency of the correctness of the material is nothing to be considered as to this stage of the recording reasons for the reopening of the assessment

RAJ KUMAR GOLECHA,PALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR, AAYKAR BHAWAN, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

1) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 139, section 147,\nsection 148, section 149, section 151 and section 153, in the case of a person\nwhere a search is initiated under section 132 or books of account, other\ndocuments or any assets are requisitioned under section 132A after the 31st\nday of May, 2003, the Assessing Officer shall—\n(a) issue

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

b) of\nexplanation 2 to section 147 are applicable in this case, obtained necessary\nsanction separately to issue notice under section 148 from Principal Commissioner\nof Income Tax as per the provisions of section 151 of the IT Act, 1961. Notice\nunder section 148 of the IT Act was issued on 26.03.2021 and duly served upon the\nassessee through ITBA

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

147, 148, 149, 151 and 153. However, they do not override the\nmandatory provisions of Sections 142(2) or 143(2)”.\n10\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn DCIT Sushil Kumar Jain 134 TTJ 844 (Indore)that “Time-limit of service of notice\nunder s. 143(2) shall also apply in respect of assessments framed

SMT. PUSHPA CHHAJER,JODHPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

b] That on 25/11/2014, the appellant had filed the ITR and financial statement through on line and declaring income of Rs. 75,62,630/- from above sources. The return filed by assessee was processed on income declared u/s 143(1) of the Act. 14 Smt. Pushpa Chhajer c] That on 09/09/2015, a survey u/s 133A was carried out at business

INDU BALA PORWAL,UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRE CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, ground no 5, 9 and 11 appeal is also allowed in favor as indicated above

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

B-1, Trimurti Circle, Govind Marg, Jaipur in ITA No. 686/JP/2014 dated 14.12.2015 ALL CARGO GLOBAL LOGISTICS LTD. V. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-44 [2012] 18 ITR(T) 106 (MUMBAI) (SB) PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX-18 V. MS. LATA JAIN [2016] 384 ITR 543 (DELHI) Gurinder Singh Bawa v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle