ALKA KHANDAKA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

carried out by way of issuance of summon u/s 131 and notice 133(6) of the Act. 8.2. During the proceedings, assessee was asked to produce the principal persons or persons related to concerns from whom assessee have made purchases. But assessee has denied to produce them. The summon were issued to these parties. Not only Inspector of this office

AGRASEN PRIMSES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

carried from audited books of accounts.\nF. CLAIM NO ADVERSE INFERENCE ON SUBMISSION OF THE\nASSESSEE\nThe assessee submitted as under:-\n1) We also submit that all above transactions of sale and purchase of shares are\ndonethrough online in Bombay Stock Exchange which is a Govt. Controlled\nAgency.\n2) All thetransactions are mentioned in assessee's demat a/c.\n3) Contract

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

losses and unabsorbed depreciation. The return was\nprocessed u/s 143 (1) and no notice u/s 143 (2) was issued. Thereafter Ld. A.O.\ninitiated reassessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s 148 on 28-03-2019\nafter recording following reasons:\n“Your letter dated 11.04.2019 wherein you have requested to provide grounds of\nreasons for opening the case. In this regard

RAHUL KASLIWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

carry forward of the capital loss nor had any capital profits for the year against which he could have set off the impugned loss. So the theory of claiming bogus short term capital loss falls flat. Here, we have a case in hand, wherein only on the basis of transacting in the name of the scrip (SMIL), tax liability

RAGHAV COMMODITIES,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

forward in an attempt to divert the attention of the first appellate authority from the core issue without producing any documentary evidence to contravene the findings of the Assessing Officer which in turn is based on the order of SEBI. Therefore, in view of the prevailing circumstances, this Ground No. 4 is dismissed. 8. It is apt to mention here

ANUSHA FINVEST PVT LTD ,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

forward business loss was already at a staggering amount of Rs. 1,39,74,664, without considering the current year's losses. Therefore, the allegations against the assessee-appellant lack a logical basis. 2.3. It is worth noting that there are only two situations in which CCM is acceptable. The first is when the broker identifies a genuine mistake

SAKET AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(3) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

forwarded sundry credits of previous year. As per normal business norms sundry creditors for goods are never outstanding for more than 2-3 months depending on the trade, hence any point of time sundry credits should never be more than the entire purchases made during the year. As per common understanding sundry credits exists because the seller of the goods

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

loss of assessee.\n\nWhereas, in the present case, both the order u/s 148A(d) of the Act and\nconsequential notice under Section 148 of the Act dated 30.07.2022 were issued\nby the JAO (i.e. local jurisdictional officer) and not in the prescribed faceless\nmanner. It is thus submitted that reassessment proceedings so completed are not\naccordance with

SPECTRUM FOODS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

forward losses with the other clients. The purpose of shifting profit was to introduce unaccounted money under the grab of trading profit. To provide fictitious profits and losses book entries, share brokers charged client a commission ranging from 1% to 3%. 19 Spectrum Foods Limited vs ITO 4.2.5 The letter mentioned earlier accompanied by a CD that contained the list

MADAN MOHAN GUPTA ,KOTA vs. ITO WARD 1(3) , KOTA

losses suffered by the\nassessee have been adjusted against the unaccounted income of the assessee,\nbooks of the assessee did not show in that particular case any drawings for\npurchase of tickets and incurring travel expenditure to 3 different cities prior to\nthe date of winning of the jackpot races. The assessee has given up the winning\nfrom the jackpots

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMPTIONS,CIRCLE,JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

bogus bills but without independent application of mind to the information renders the reopening void. (vi) CIT Vs. SFIL Stock Broking Ltd. (2010) 41 DTR 98 (Del) Reassessment-Reason to believe-Reopening on directions of superior officers-50-called reasons recorded by the AO for reopening assessee's assessment comprises mere information received from Dy. Director of IT (Inv.) followed

GAYATRI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

loss of revenue, or where two views are possible and the Assessing Officer has taken one view with which the Commissioner does not agree, it cannot be treated as an erroneous order prejudicial to the Revenue, unless the view taken by the Assessing Officer is unsustainable in law." Ratio of these cases fully apply on the facts of the present

PAWAN GUPTA,KOTA vs. ITO WARD 1(3) KOTA , KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

losses suffered by the assessee have been\nadjusted against the unaccounted income of the assessee, books of the assessee did not show\nin that particular case any drawings for purchase of tickets and incurring travel expenditure\nto 3 different cities prior to the date of winning of the jackpot races. The assessee has given up\nthe winning from the jackpots

MACRO PROPRIETIES PRIVATE LIMITED,M 28 INCOME TAX COLONY TONK ROAD JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No.174 TO 177/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2013-14 TO 2016-17 M/s. Macro Properties Pvt. Ltd.M-28, Income Tax Colony, Tonk Road Jaipur cuke Vs. The DCIT Central Circle-2 LIC Building, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCM 3633 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri C.M. Agarwal, CA jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri JameshKurian, CI

forward losses of A.Y. 2012-13 and 2013- 14 claimed at Rs 5,98,326/ - No reference to any seized or impounded material. ii. Addition of Rs 46,62,867 / on account of alleged short term capital gains- Documents referred to are data received from tally software installed at the office premises of M/s F.S. Housing Pvt Ltd during

SHRI KHATU SHYAM BUILDERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

forward business loss in its return of income would not be liable for penalty under section 271(1)(c) when even allowance of such claim would have no financial implication for future [In favour of assessee]” 8 SHRI KHATU SHYAM BUILDERS VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR 2.18 The disallowance by the ld. AO, in the quantum proceedings, was solely

PRAMILA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(5), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

carried out in year 2016 and prior to 31-3-2021 in premises of\nanother assessee and nothing more and, therefore, no proceedings for reassessment\ncould be drawn under section 148A - Assessing Officer did not find merit in reply of\nassessee and passed an order under section 148A(d) - Whether since entire basis for\nreopening assessment was nothing but material

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

carried when on various inspection/detection it is noticed that there is carriage of load beyond the permissible limit and that the overweight items have to be immediately removed and "If permitted to be continued, it would amount to fresh commission of the offence for which the compounding was done". Professional Automotives Private Limited vs. ACIT Similar view has been taken

MAHESH KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT ,CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

bogus cash sales. 4.23. Ld. AO at page 6 of his order has relied upon certain decisions. The said decisions are factually different from the case at hand. The assessee has distinguished the case laws before the ld. CIT(A), which have been reproduced at page 42 and 43 of the ld. CIT(A) order. The same may please

VINOD GUPTA,JHUNJHUNU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHUNJHUNU

Appeal is disposed of and the impugned addition is restricted to Rs

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

bogus purchases cannot also be sustained in full or in part in view of the various cases laws cited by the assessee and in view of the facts that the decision of Vijay Proteins Ltd. and Sanjay Oil Cake Industries are not applicable to the facts of the assessee's case. Assessee's case is covered by the decision