ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

5A are also an exception to the rule that when an income which is\nultimately brought to tax is declared in a return of income, there can be no\nquestion of treating the Assessee as having \"concealed particulars of income or\nfurnished inaccurate particulars of income\". Those Explanations will also not\napply in the present case because those Explanations

M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

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

TDS was deducted. As the stock issued to above persons is not found recorded in the books of accounts, hence, it is evident that the stock of gold ornaments weighing to 2266.25 gram is unaccounted sale of the assessee which is computes at Rs. 2900/-. In view of the above, the entries noted on these pages reflect the unaccounted transaction

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of the revenue stands dismissed

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

TDS was deducted. As the stock issued to above persons is not found recorded in the books of accounts, hence, it is evident that the stock of gold ornaments weighing to 2266.25 gram is unaccounted sale of the assessee which is computes at Rs. 2900/-. In view of the above, the entries noted on these pages reflect the unaccounted transaction

M/S BANSAL OIL MILL LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section provides that if any sum is found credited in the books of accounts, then the assessee has to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the party from whom amount is received and the genuineness of the transaction. In the present case, the assessee has not only proved the identity of the party from whom the loan has been taken