INDIRA GIRI,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARMENT JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Furnishing Itr, Therefore Deposit In Capital Gain Account For Compliance U/S 54(2) Was Impossible On The Part Of The Assessee.

gain of Rs. 9.98 lakh - It booked a new flat with a builder and claimed exemption under section 54 - Assessing Officer denied exemption on ground that assessee could neither prove possession of residential flat within a period of two years from date of transfer of old flat nor had deposited unutilized capital

GURUVENDRA SINGH ,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Capital Gain. of claiming benefits under  However, exemption under Section 54B was restricted to long term Section 54B. capital gain

DCIT,C-7, JAIPUR vs. BHARAT MOHAN RATURI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed and that of the C

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 413/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2013-14 The DCIT Circle-7 Jaipur cuke Vs. Shri Bharat Mohan Raturi 161, Indira Colony, Bani Park Jaipur 302 015 (Raj) LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANPR 7066G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 2/JP/2023 (Arising out of vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 413/JP/2022 ) fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2013-14 Shri Bharat Mohan Raturi 161, Indira

Capital Gain on sold plot was arised of Rs 94,39,201/- (Sale consideration amount Rs 1,00,00,000/- Indexed cost of acquisition Rs 5,60,799/-) The assessee claimed and was allowed exemption

SHRI ARNAV GOYAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

capital gain claimed as exempt income u/s 10(38) was a bogus accommodation entry without appreciating the facts and circumstances

SITA DEVI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD-4(1), JAIPUR

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

capital gain exemption U/S 10(38) of the IT Act on the basis of investigation report with named list of penny

SHRI ASHNUTH GOYAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, WARD -1(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him. Thus, The Addition Of Rs. 30,04,864/- So Uphold Deserves To Be Deleted. Shri Ashnuth Goyal Vs Acit, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

capital gain claimed as exempt income u/s 10(38) was a bogus accommodation entry without appreciating the facts and circumstances

SHRI GULAB CHAND MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 49/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Cuke Shri Gulab Chand Meena, A.C.I.T.(Osd), Vs. Village- Dantali, Tehsil- Range-7, Sanganer, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Abupm 2026 R Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Manish Agarwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)- 3, Jaipur Dated 06/12/2017 For The A.Y. 2011-12 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Deduction U/S 54F Of Rs. 5,78,571/- Made By Ld.Ao Arbitrarily & Accordingly Treating It As A Long Term Capital Gain When All The Conditions Prescribed U/S 54F Were Fulfilled By Assessee. 1.1. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Further Erred In Not Considering The Fact That Assessee Had Submitted The Valuation Report In Support Of His Claim Of 2

capital gain account, exemption u/s 54 can be availed if the full amount of capital gain is utilized within time

CHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

Capital Gains and Other Sources. The assessee also claimed exempted income under the head capital gain amounting to Rs. 5, 79,283/- u/s. 10(38) of the Act. The revenue

OMPRAKASH,DHOLPUR vs. ITO WARD 4 BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes as indicated hereinabove\nOrder pronounced in the open court on\n17/01/2025

gains - Capital asset (Agricultural land)\n Assessment year 2007-08 - Assessee sold its agricultural land and claimed exemption\nfrom capital

NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

exempt income of Rs. 1,28,65,591/- in the shape of Long Term Capital Gain on sale of share

GOVERDHAN SIGH SHEKHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

Capital gains—Exemption under s. 54F—Non deposit of gains in the Capital Gains Account Scheme—Assessee selling his plot

LAL CHAND MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 5(2), JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

capital gains and exemptions allowable are two distinct and separate provisions that do not override each other. Sec 54F is an exemption

RAJRAJESHWARI GUPTA ,KOTA vs. ITO , WARD 1(1),KOTA, KOTA

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

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

capital gain [claimed exempt u/s 10(38)] as accommodation entry and thus bogus, and further adding an amount of Rs.18

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

capital gain [claimed exempt u/s 10(38)] as\naccommodation entry and thus bogus, and further adding an amount of\nRs.17

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

Capital Gain earned by assessee as mere\naccommodation entry and bogus and thereby withdrawing exemption u/s 10(38);\nand making

LAL CHAND MEENA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7-3, JAIPUR

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

capital gains in the hands of the assessee is hereby deleted. In the result, ground no. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed. ITA No. 515/JP/15 Lalchand Meena, vs. ITO, Ward 7(3), Jaipur 27. In respect of ground No. 2, brief facts of the case are that the AO observed that assessee has deposited Rs.1

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

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

exemption u/s 10 (38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as tabulated here in below:- Name of Quantity Date of Cost of Date of Sale proceeds Long term scrip Purchase purchase sale capital gain

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

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

exemption u/s 10 (38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as tabulated here in below:- Name of Quantity Date of Cost of Date of Sale proceeds Long term scrip Purchase purchase sale capital gain