DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER vs. ANOOP KUMAR GUPTA, AJMER

In the result appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

unexplained investment u/s. 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 7. Aggrieved from the addition made by the ld. AO, assessee has carried the matter in appeal before the ld CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. On the issue of addition of Rs. 6.21 crore the relevant findings

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER vs. CHANDRA KANT SAINI , AJMER

In the result appeals of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

unexplained investment u/s. 69 r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act. 7. Aggrieved from the addition made by the ld. AO, assessee has carried the matter in appeal before the ld CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. On the issue of addition of Rs. 6.21 crore the relevant findings

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition of Rs. 2,56,996 made w.r.t. Kotak Bank Loan is hereby directed to be deleted. In view of the above, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 6. Ground of Appeal No. 4 is as under: Ground

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition of Rs. 2,56,996 made w.r.t. Kotak Bank Loan is hereby directed to be deleted. In view of the above, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 6. Ground of Appeal No. 4 is as under: Ground

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition of Rs. 2,56,996 made w.r.t. Kotak Bank Loan is hereby directed to be deleted. In view of the above, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 6. Ground of Appeal No. 4 is as under: Ground

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition of Rs. 2,56,996 made w.r.t. Kotak Bank Loan is hereby directed to be deleted. In view of the above, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 6. Ground of Appeal No. 4 is as under: Ground

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition of Rs. 2,56,996 made w.r.t. Kotak Bank Loan is hereby directed to be deleted. In view of the above, this ground of appeal is partly allowed. 6. Ground of Appeal No. 4 is as under: Ground

JAGDISH PRASAD DHAKA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

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

unexplained investment and addition should not be made. The relevant paragraph of show cause notice is reproduced as under- "You have been asked to file reconciliation statement with TDS

VISHNO MOTWANI,AJMER vs. CIRCLE(INTTAX), JAIPUR

Appeal is hereby allowed and the impugned order dated 25

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

investment remained unexplained by the assessee. 4. The details of the FDRs, as available in the impugned assessment order, read as under:- Sr. No. Date of creating FDR FDR amount 1. 12.05.2014 20,00,000 2. 14.06.2014 25,00,000 3. 17.06.2014 25,00,000 4. 25.07.2014 25,00,000 3 Sh. Vishno Motwani, Ajmer

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

unexplained investment u/s 69 of\nthe Act.\nIn his submission appellant has made contention that He was acting as a\nmiddleman in dealing with sale transaction (total agreed sale consideration was\nRs.1,32,51,000/-) of an agricultural land situated at village Saroopgarh, Tehsil\nHindoli, Bundi. The facts of the case are that one Shri Nirmal Singh Anand S/o\nDileep

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

investment under section 69 of the IT Act, 1961. In his submission\nthe appellant has made contention that no cash was actually paid as mentioned\nin the said Agreement cum Memorandum of Understanding to sale but that was\nonly a notional/symbolical amount and written for bank loan purposes. Further he\nmade contention that the observation and finding

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,BHIWADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

unexplained investment is thus confirmed.\n4.6 Similarly, as regards the commission/brokerage income of Rs.31,17,181 is\nconcerned the following information was available with AO.\nBerry Developers and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Rs.25,52,624 (TDS

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

investment under section 69 of the IT Act, 1961. In his submission\nthe appellant has made contention that no cash was actually paid as mentioned\nin the said Agreement cum Memorandum of Understanding to sale but that was\nonly a notional/symbolical amount and written for bank loan purposes. Further he\nmade contention that the observation and finding

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

investment under section 69 of the IT Act, 1961. In his submission\nthe appellant has made contention that no cash was actually paid as mentioned\nin the said Agreement cum Memorandum of Understanding to sale but that was\nonly a notional/symbolical amount and written for bank loan purposes. Further he\nmade contention that the observation and finding

GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

unexplained investment u/s 69A of the\nAct ignoring the submission of assessee filed before Ld CIT(A) that the\ninvestment was made out of NRE account.\n9. That addition of Rs 9810/- U/s 194A of the Act is also unlawful.\n10. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. CIT(A)\ngrossly erred

GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

unexplained which was added to the total income. Interest of Rs. 9,810/- received by the assessee was also added to the total income. The assessment was finalised at the total income of Rs. 1,15,09,810/-. 7. Aggrieved from the order of the assessing officer in the quantum proceeding the assessee preferred an appeal before

SURYA SINGHAL,KOTA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

unexplained cash paid amount of Rs.\n11,00,000/- in three hands instead of only in the hands of the appellant as narrated in the\nseized documents and as admitted by him in his statements recorded during the search and\ntherein offered for taxation. So, this ground of appeal on this sum of Rs.11,00,000/- paid as\nunexplained investment

DCIT,INT.TAX, JAIPUR vs. DEVIDASS ASWANI, JODHPUR

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

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

investment in t year leveraged NRE deposit of ICICI Bank and USD 10,500 is upfront fees@1.75% of amount transferred. The conversion rate during that period was 62.55 which works out to Rs. 3,75,30,000/- (USD 6,00,000* 62.55) 8.5 With regard to the addition made by AO of Rs. 2.99.339/ on account of unexplained deposits

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. DEVIDASS ASWANI, JODHPUR

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

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

investment in t year leveraged NRE deposit of ICICI Bank and USD 10,500 is upfront fees@1.75% of amount transferred. The conversion rate during that period was 62.55 which works out to Rs. 3,75,30,000/- (USD 6,00,000* 62.55) 8.5 With regard to the addition made by AO of Rs. 2.99.339/ on account of unexplained deposits