ARGUS GOLDEN TRADES INDIA LTD.,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

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

1. Penalty u/s 272A(2)(g) Penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) 2. The reasons provided by the assessee In the case of assessee the reasons put for non filing the return within time forward by the assessee has direct nexus was that there was a criminal suit filed with the law since without obtaining PAN against the managing partner

M/S WORLD TRADE PARK LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

section 272A(2)(k), the AO has levied the penalty due to the default of the assessee in filing the quarterly TDS statement in Form No. 24Q and 26Q. It is pertinent to note that the Form No. 24Q and 26Q are required for submitting the quarterly TDS statement in respect of TDS on salary and TDS on non salary

M/S WORLD TRADE PARK LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

section 272A(2)(k), the AO has levied the penalty due to the default of the assessee in filing the quarterly TDS statement in Form No. 24Q and 26Q. It is pertinent to note that the Form No. 24Q and 26Q are required for submitting the quarterly TDS statement in respect of TDS on salary and TDS on non salary

M/S DANISH PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

272A, no penalty can be imposed unless the assessee is given an opportunity of being heard. All these provisions indicate that the failure on the part of the assessee, who was the payer of the interest, to file the declarations given to him by the payees of the interest, within the time-limit specified in sub-section (2) to section

GOVINDAM BRJ INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIR-6,JPR, JAIPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

272A(1)(d), which are not sustainable when the primary addition itself is not justified. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all of the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. We find that both these appeals filed by the assessee are delayed by 68 days each. The assessee

GOVINDAM BRJ INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIR-6,JPR, JAIPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

272A(1)(d), which are not\nsustainable when the primary addition itself is not justified.\n8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all of the above\ngrounds of appeal at the time of hearing.\"\n3.\nWe find that both these appeals filed by the assessee are delayed by 68 days\neach. The assessee

SHANKAR JHALANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

272A(1)(c) was imposed by the JCIT, Range for non compliance of summon issued under section 131 of the IT Act. It is also noted from the remand report of the AO that again an opportunity was provide to the appellant by the AO to explain its case, however, still no compliance was made on the date fixed. This

MAHAVIR PRASAD JIAN,TONK vs. ITO, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: This Bench.

section 272A(2)(k) of the Act is leviable. However, the same is to be restricted from the date of payment of TDS to the date of filing e-TDS statements since e-TDS statements cannot be filed without payment of TDS to the credit of Central Government. Similar ratio has been laid down by the Chandigarh Bench of Tribunal

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRATEEK KOTHARI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court.”

TDS. (iii) Capacity proved:- The assessee has filed copy of balance sheet and profit and loss account of the firm. The turnover of the firm is Rs 219.58 crores. The assessee has also filed copy of bank statement of the firm which shows huge number of transaction of high value. There is no onus on the assessee to prove source

ANSHU SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

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

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

Section 69A. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) and AO have erred in law and on facts of the case i) by treating the cash deposit of Rs. 2499800/- during 01/4/2016 to 31/10/2016 out of the opening cash balance as on 01/4/2016 as 'explained", ii) by treating the cash deposit of Rs. 1522500/- during 09/11/2016 to 30/12/2016 as unexplained

DISTRICT EXCISE OFFICE, RAJASTHAN SARKAR, EXCISE DEPARTMENT,KARAULI vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 547/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2011-12 cuke District Excise Office, J.C.I.T., Vs. Rajasthan Sarkar, Excise Range TDS, Department, Gulab Bagh, Karauli. Udaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj