Lunard Dimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). Recently in CIT v. Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd.

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)

…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 Mehta Parikh…

ANIL KUMAR BATAR,SIKAR vs. PCIT-JAIPUR-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

…uthorities. Kindly refer Mehta Pareek& Co. 30 ITR 181 (SC),\nITO v. Dr.TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp)Paras Cotton Company\nvs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s LunardDimond Ltd. 281 ITR\n1 (Del). Recently in CIT v/s Bhawani Oil Mills (P) Ltd 239 CTR\n445/49 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\ncreditor before the AO.\nRecently this Honble ITAT in the case of NarayaniBaiDangi v/s ITO\nWard 2(1), Udaipur in ITA No.22/Jodh/2022 dt.13.10.2023 it has been\nheld that we respectfully relied on the order Mehta Pari…

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

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

…orities.\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 order Mehta Pa…

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

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

…orities.\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 order Mehta Pa…

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

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

…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 Mehta Parikh…

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.TejgopalBhatnagar 20 TW 368 (Jp)Paras Cotton Company vs. CIT (2003) 30 TW 168 (JD)., CIT v/s LunardDimond Ltd. 281 ITR 1 (Del). 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 his affidavit and the ld. AO has not rebutted the contents of the affidavit even he not examined to the person it mean either she was sat…

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)

…uthorities. 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 Mehta Parikh…

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)

…आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”B” JAIPUR Jhlanhi xkslkbZ]U;kf;d lnL; ,o aJhjkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 433/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year : 2018-19 cuke Balaji Jewellers The ACIT G-5, Siddhi Vinayak Complex Vs. Central Circle-4 Maniram Ji Ki Kothi, Haldiyon Ka Rasta Jaipur Jaipur 302 003 LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAOFB 3695 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Shrawan Kumar Gu…

M/S. MAHALAXMI SAWS PVT. LTD., H-39, ROAD NO.2B, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SIRSI ROAD, BINDAYAKA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

…er authorities, thus the addition deserves to be deleted. He also relied on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Delhi ITAT decision in the case of Phool Singh vs ACIT. ITA No. 2901/Del/2014. (ii) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Bhawani Oil Mills (Raj.) 49 DTR 212 (iii) CIT Vs. Jai Kumar Bakliwal (Raj.) 366 ITR 217. (iv) Aravali Trading Co. Vs. ITO (Raj.) 187 Taxman 338 (v) CIT v. Ranchhod Jivabhai Nakhava [2012] 208 Taxman 35 (Gui.) In view of above, it is requested that addition of Rs.21,80,000/- deserves to be deleted.” 11. On the other hand, the ld. DR has vehemently supported the orders of the auth…

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE 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@…

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

…nding 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 which had incrim…

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

…nding 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 which had incrim…