INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(8), SURAT vs. MAHAVEER SHANTILAL JAIN, SURAT

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.453/Srt/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Ito, Vs. Mahaveer Shantilal Jain, Ward-2(3)(8), Prop. M/S Mukesh Diamonds, 1St Surat. Office No.401, Floor, H.No.5/1171/72/73/1090, New Dtc, Hath Falia, Haripura, Surat – 395009. (Appellant) (Respondent) "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aqupj6439L Appellant By Shri Ritesh Mishra, Cit(Dr) Respondent By Shri P. M. Jagasheth, Ca Date Of Hearing 08/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 25/09/2023

u/s 143 (3) of the Act and this defect can not be cured by taking recourse to the provisions of section 292 BB of the Act. 19. In view of the above, we hold that the AO had no valid jurisdiction to pass the assessment order and the very foundation of the assessment proceedings is bad in law. Hence, these

INCOME TAX OFFICER, SURAT vs. ASHOK KUMAR JINDAL, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Ms. Suchitra Kamble

deemed dividend which has been received from partnership firm in which the assessee having more than 10% of shareholding. (ii) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made by the AO u/s. 2(22)(e) of the Act and did not appreciate that the Auditor