20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v. Lunard Dimond Ltd.

VIJIT SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…nIncome Tax authorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC),\nITO v. Dr.TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp)Paras Cotton Company vs.\nCIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s LunardDimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1\n(Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd_239 CTR 445/49\nDTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated\nas of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the\nAO.\nRecently this Honble ITAT in the case of NarayaniBaiDangi v/s ITO Ward\n2(1), Udaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been held that\nwe respectfully relied on the ord…

KAILASH CHAND MEENA,ALWAR vs. ITO WARD2(3), ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

…Income Tax authorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr. TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s Lunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the AO. Recently this Honble ITAT in the case of Narayani Bai Dangi v/s ITO Ward 2(1), Udaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been held that we respectfully relied on the order M…

RAMESH KUMAR,JHUNJHUNU vs. ITO WARD-1, JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU

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

…ome Tax authorities.\nKindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr. TejgopalBhatnagar\n20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s\nLunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in_CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P)\nLtd_239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could\nnot be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the\nAO.\nRecently this Honble ITAT in the case of Narayani Bai Dangi v/s ITO Ward 2(1),\nUdaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been held that we respectfully\nrelied on the or…

RAMESH KUMAR,JHUNJHUNU vs. ITO WARD-1 JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU

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

…ome Tax authorities.\nKindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr. TejgopalBhatnagar\n20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s\nLunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in_CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P)\nLtd_239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could\nnot be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the\nAO.\nRecently this Honble ITAT in the case of Narayani Bai Dangi v/s ITO Ward 2(1),\nUdaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been held that we respectfully\nrelied on the or…

RAMESH KUMAR,JHUNJHUNU vs. ITO WARD-1, JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

…Income Tax authorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr. TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s Lunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the AO. Recently this Honble ITAT in the case of Narayani Bai Dangi v/s ITO Ward 2(1), Udaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been held that we respectfully relied on the order M…

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

…Income Tax authorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr. Tejgopal Bhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s Lunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the AO. 3.3 Recently this Honble ITAT in the case of Narayani Bai Dangi v/s ITO Ward 2(1), Udaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been held that we 33 Kath Brothers vs. ACIT re…

JAGDISH KUMAR ARORA,BHAWANIMANDI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

…Income Tax authorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ITO v. Dr. Tejgopal Bhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp) Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s Lunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the AO. Recently this Honble ITAT in the case of Narayani Bai Dangi v/s ITO Ward 2(1), Udaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been held that we respectfully relied on the order M…

BALAJI JEWELLERS ,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CC -4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

…rebutted by the evidence. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC) ,, ITO v. Dr.TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp)Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s LunardDimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the AO. Through Affidavit as submitted before Ld. AO during the course of Assessment Proceedings it was stated under Point No. 8…… 55 ITA 433/JP/2023 BALAJI JEWELLERS VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRC…

SHRI KAILASH CHAND YADAV,SIKAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD, NEEMKATHANA

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 173/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2014-15 Shri Kailash Chand Yadav, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. S/O-Shri Chhotu Ram Yadav, Ward-Neemkathana Dhani Amar Singh Wali Mundru, Tehsil-Srimadhopur, Sikar. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aiupy 2977 J Appellant Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Smt. Monisha Choudhary(Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 25/06/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 30/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 23/01/2019 For The A.Y. 2014-15. The Grounds Taken By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. The Impugned Assessment Order U/S 143(3) Rws 147 Dated 19/12/2017 As Well As The Action Taken U/S 147/148 By The Ld. Ao Are Bad In Law, Invalid, Illegal & On Facts Of The Case, For Want Of Jurisdiction, Barred By Limitation & Various Other Reasons & Hence The Same May Kindly Be Quashed. 2. Rs.13,00,000/-: The Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Law As Well As On The Facts Of The Case In Confirming The Addition Of Rs. 13,00,000/- Made By The Ld. Ao On Account Of Cash Deposit Without Invoking Any Provision Of The It Act & By Ignoring The Material Evidences On Assumption Or Suspicion. Hence The Addition So Made By The Ld. Ao & Sustained By 2

…ial pronouncements: i. Mehta Pareek & Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC), ii. ITO v. Dr. Tejgopal Bhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp) iii. Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., iv. CIT v/s Lunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212(Raj.)- It has been held that contents of affidavit could not be treated as of a lesser importance than the statement given by the creditor before the AO. And in the present case in support the assessee had filed the affidavit of his father who has given the money to the assessee and when the same has been confirmed in the statements ta…

SHRI JAISINGH YADAV,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1290 & 1291/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2014-15 & 2015-16 Cuke Jaisingh Yadav, A.C.I.T., Vs. 1, Mehta Ki Dhani, Chandra Nagar- Central Circle-3, A, Govindpura, Kalwar Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Acwpy 5493 R Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Avinash Khandelwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 07/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur Dated 18/09/2019 For The A.Y. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively. Grounds Taken By The Assessee In Both These Appeals Are Reproduced As Under: Grounds Of Ita No. 1290/Jp/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) “1. The Learned Ao Has Seriously Erred In Law & Facts In Making Addition Of Rs. 1274700 In The Income Of Assessee As Undisclosed Income. Hon'Ble Cit (Appeals) Has Seriously Erred In Rejecting The Appeal Of Assessee & Confirming The Additions Without Considering The Appeal Submission & On Wrong Premise. The Learned Cit (Appeals) Erred In Referring The Copy Of Itr Of Female Family Members Of Assessee As Certain Loose Documents Which Contained Incriminating Transaction & Also Erred In Stating That The Appellant

…the facts binding upon the income tax authorities. Reliance is placed on the following cases: Mehta Parikh & Co. 30 ITR 181(SC); ITO Vs Dr. Tejgopal Bhatnagar 20 TW 368 (JP); Paras Cotton Company Vs CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD); CIT Vs Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212 (Raj) 7. Finding of learned CIT(A) in his order confirming the addition made by AO The learned CIT has mentioned that “at the appellant premises certain loose documents which contained incriminating transactions were found. When confronted he owned up all these transactions.” While it may be noted no such loose papers were found whic…

SHRI JAISINGH YADAV,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1290 & 1291/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2014-15 & 2015-16 Cuke Jaisingh Yadav, A.C.I.T., Vs. 1, Mehta Ki Dhani, Chandra Nagar- Central Circle-3, A, Govindpura, Kalwar Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Acwpy 5493 R Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Avinash Khandelwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 07/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 21/10/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur Dated 18/09/2019 For The A.Y. 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively. Grounds Taken By The Assessee In Both These Appeals Are Reproduced As Under: Grounds Of Ita No. 1290/Jp/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) “1. The Learned Ao Has Seriously Erred In Law & Facts In Making Addition Of Rs. 1274700 In The Income Of Assessee As Undisclosed Income. Hon'Ble Cit (Appeals) Has Seriously Erred In Rejecting The Appeal Of Assessee & Confirming The Additions Without Considering The Appeal Submission & On Wrong Premise. The Learned Cit (Appeals) Erred In Referring The Copy Of Itr Of Female Family Members Of Assessee As Certain Loose Documents Which Contained Incriminating Transaction & Also Erred In Stating That The Appellant

…the facts binding upon the income tax authorities. Reliance is placed on the following cases: Mehta Parikh & Co. 30 ITR 181(SC); ITO Vs Dr. Tejgopal Bhatnagar 20 TW 368 (JP); Paras Cotton Company Vs CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD); CIT Vs Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR 445/49 DTR 212 (Raj) 7. Finding of learned CIT(A) in his order confirming the addition made by AO The learned CIT has mentioned that “at the appellant premises certain loose documents which contained incriminating transactions were found. When confronted he owned up all these transactions.” While it may be noted no such loose papers were found whic…