DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH, RAJKOT

1)(b) were defective and not followed correctly. Specifically, there was a non-application of mind by the Assessing Officer in not quoting the 'assessment year' and other crucial details, rendering the reassessment proceedings invalid.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["Section 147", "Section 148

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT vs. SHRI MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH, RAJKOT

reassessment proceedings were invalid due to procedural defects and lack of proper documentation.", "held": "The Tribunal found that the reasons recorded by the Assessing Officer, the approval of the satisfaction note, the notice under section 148, and the procedures under sections 148A and 149(1

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

sections": ["147", "148", "143(3)", "145(3)", "132", "133A", "131", "148A", "149", "149(1)(b)", "43CA", "153A", "153C", "151"], "issues": "The primary issue was the validity of the reassessment

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

1)(b).", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "147", "148", "148A", "149", "153A", "153C", "143(3)", "145(3)", "43CA" ], "issues": "Whether the reassessment

ABDULKADAR HAJIAHMED VADIWALA,JAMNAGAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.103/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17 Abdulkadar Hajiahmed Vadiwala The Pr.Cit बनाम Maniar Street, Lindi Bazar Jamanagar. Jamnagar-361001 Vs. Pan : Aatpv 4729 Q (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Chetan Agarwal, Ld.Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr

reassessment notice. 80. In Ashish Agarwal (supra), this Court directed that Section 148 notices which were challenged before various High Courts "shall be deemed to have been issued under Section 148-A of the Income Tax Act as substituted by the Finance Act, 2021 and construed or treated to be show-cause notices in terms of Section 148

JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD 2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

reassessment notices under section 148 of the new regime. 112. Let us take the instance of a notice issued on 1

JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD-2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

reassessment notices under section 148 of the new regime. 112. Let us take the instance of a notice issued on 1

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, RAJKOT., RAJKOT

1)(b) of the Act. Consequently, the reassessment proceedings were quashed.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "147", "148", "148A", "149", "143(3)", "132", "133A

MUKESH MANEKCHAND SHETH,RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT-ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE -2, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

148(A) and 149 of the Act, were not followed by the assessing officer as\nthese sections were amended with effect from 01.04.2021,and the procedure laid\ndown in these sectionswere not followed by the assessing officer, hence\nreassessment proceedings are not valid. The Ld.Counsel also stated that the time\nlimit, which is mentioned in section 149(1

KISHAN BEEJ,JAMNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं/.Ita No.384/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kishan Beej Ito, Wared-2(1) बनाम Kashivishvanath Road Jamnagar – 361 001 Nr. P & T Office Vs. Jamnagar – 361 001 Pan : Aacfk 2114 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) :

1-4-2021, TOLA was still in existence, and the revenue could not have ignored the application of TOLA and its notifications. Therefore, for issuing a reassessment notice under section 148

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

1) of the Act, various details are called for by the Faceless AO and subsequently the assessment order is also framed by the Faceless AO. 4. It is stated that section 151A of the Act has contemplated formulation of Scheme for both assessment, reassessment and re-computation under section 147 as well as for issuance of notice under section 148

SHRI GANDHI MAULANA AZAD SHRAMJIVI ASHRA,KUTCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1, RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeals of the assessee, are allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

1) of the Act, various details are called for by the Faceless AO and subsequently the assessment order is also framed by the Faceless AO. 4. It is stated that section 151A of the Act has contemplated formulation of Scheme for both assessment, reassessment and re-computation under section 147 as well as for issuance of notice under section 148

SHRI GIRISHBHAI NANJIBHAI SOLANKI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2), RAJKOT

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 31 & 32/Rjt/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Years:2011-12, 2012-13 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"

section 148 of the Act read as under: [Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. 148. [(1)] Before making the assessment, reassessment

SHRI GIRISHBHAI NANJIBHAI SOLANKI,RAJKOT vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 (1) (2), RAJKOT

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos. 31 & 32/Rjt/2020 िनधा"रणवष"/Asstt. Years:2011-12, 2012-13 िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष" िनधा"रणवष"

section 148 of the Act read as under: [Issue of notice where income has escaped assessment. 148. [(1)] Before making the assessment, reassessment

KALPESH RAVJIBHAI SOJITRA,JASDAN vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1)(2), RAJKOT, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, in above terms

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha(Hybrid Hearing) Kalpesh Ravjibhai Sojitra, Vs. The Ito, Prop. Sojitra Petrolium, Bypass Ward-2(1)(2), Circle Atkot Road, Jasdan, Rajkot 360050, Rajkot-( Guj) "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bqmps8120G (/Appellant) (/Respondent)

1 had considered the effect and interpretation of the Section 151 (A) of the Income Tax as extracted herein under: "3. It is apparent that the impugned notice dated 5 April, 2022 issued under Section 148 of the Act and the order of the same date under Section 148A(d) of the Act are issued by the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer

M/S. SHREEDHAR CONSTRUCTION ,JAMNAGAR vs. THE ITO WARD- 1 (3) JAMNAGAR, JAMNAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee, is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 542/Rjt/2025 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) (Hybrid Hearing) M/S. Shreedhar Construction, The Ito, Vs. 211, Divyam Complex Airodrome Ward-1(3), Road,Jamnagar-361006 ( Gujarat) Jamnagar "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclfs0395R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

reassessment notices under section 148 of the new regime. 112. Let us take the instance of a notice issued on 1

MOHAN HARDASMAL TAHILYANI,GANDHIDHAM vs. INCOMETAX OFFICER WARD 1 GANDHIDHAM, GANDHIDHAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

reassessment\nregime mandate that a notice under Section 148 must be issued with prior sanction\nfrom the specified authority under the revised Section 151 of the Act. The absence\nof approval under the amended section 151 of the Act, further invalidates the\nnotice issued in this case.\n11. I note that the new -regime, as outlined in section 148A

MANSUKHBHAI KANJIBHAI SAKARIYA,RAJKOT vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RAJKOT-1, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.318/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2016-17 Mansukhbhai Kanjibhai Sakariya The Pr.Commissioner Of बनाम At Khajuri Gundala Income Tax-1, Rajkot. Post Station: Vavdi Vs. Amarnagar, Khajuri Gundala. Pan : Aslps 7027 E (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Singhal, Ld.Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Ld.Cit-Dr

reassessment order itself is not valid, therefore, subsequent order passed by the ld.Pr.CIT by exercising the revisionary jurisdiction is also bad in law. 6.The assessee also submitted before ld. PCIT that during the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer has conducted sufficient inquiry in respect of the issue raised by the ld. Pr. CIT. The assessee also submitted before the ld.Pr.CIT

GOPAL SNACKS PVT LTD ,RAJKOT vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), RAJKOT

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /.Ita Nos. 498 & 499/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2020-21 बनाम Gopal Snacks Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Commissioner Of Plot No.2322-2324, Gidc Metoda, Income Tax Vs. Lodhika, Rajkot, Gujarat-360021 Circle-1(1), Rajkot Pan : Aadcg6113A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala & Shri K. K. Maloo, Ars. राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Cit.Dr & Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 19/11/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08/12/2025

148 of the Act for issuance of notice, and in a faceless manner, to the extent provided in section 144B of the Act with reference to making assessment or reassessment of total income or loss of assessee." 2.1. We have also gone through the notice u/s 142(1