Prithvi Raj Singh Vs I.T.O.

Last updated: 31 December 2020

Court :
ITAT Jaipur

Brief :
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-1, Jaipur dated 01/11/2019 for the A.Y. 2010-11. Following grounds have been taken by the assessee:

Citation :
ITA No. 1356/JP/2019

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR
BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM

ITA No. 1356/JP/2019
Assessment Year: 2010-11

Prithvi Raj Singh,
93, Dhuleshwar Garden, Sardar Patel Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur.
cuke
PAN No.: AFEPS 6669 A
Appellant

Vs.

I.T.O.,
Ward-2(2),
Jaipur.
Respondent

Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Soni (CA)
Revenue by : Shri Ambrish Bedi (CIT-DR)

Date of Hearing : 20/10/2020
Date of Pronouncement : 21/12/2020

ORDER

PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, J.M.

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-1, Jaipur dated 01/11/2019 for the A.Y. 2010-11. Following grounds have been taken by the assessee:

“1. Under the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the order dated 01.11.2019 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is perverse, non-speaking, arbitrary and bad in law.

2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding impugned Order dated 26.12.2017 passed by Ld. AO which is perverse, arbitrary, without jurisdiction and bad in law.

3. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in
a. upholding the impugned proceedings u/s 147 of the Act,
b. upholding the issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act by assessing officer having no jurisdiction upon assessee.
c. upholding the impugned reasons recorded by the non-jurisdictional AO u/s 147 of the Act.

To know more in details find the attachment file