DINESSH KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD4(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reopened on the reason that the assessee has claimed bogus Long\nTerm Capital Gain of Rs.15,95,000/- and has not disclosed the capital gain earned\nand income escaped assessment

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 declared by the assessee was NIL. During the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee observed some mistake in the computation of LTCG income and therefore filed a revised computation of income along with covering letter dated 28.12.2015 declaring sale consideration of plot at Rs. 1,00,00,000, Investment in new house property

TIJARIA POLYPIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRLCE 4, JAIPUR

capital from these two parties. In the reasons of reopening the leamed AO\nhas stated that credits were received from these two parties. At the stage of\nforming of the reasons of reopening the conclusive finding cannot be arrived at\ndue to the limited records of the appellant available on the file of the assessing\nauthority. At this stage there

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reopening the assessment on the ground that assessee entered into transaction in the shares of Midland Polymers PMC Fincorp Ltd., though assessee himself had offered short term capital gain

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)

reopening of the assessment is proper. 9.2 On merits, we notice that the broker i.e. CIL Securities Ltd. has made CCM in the case of the assessee involving 13 transactions, the details of which is reproduced by CIT(A) in his order at page 11. 9.3 Client Code Modification means, modification/change of the client codes after execution of trades. Vide

VINITA BAJORIA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No. 370/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Vinita Bajoria 1, Ganesh Colony Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur बनाम Income Tax Officer, Ward 5(2), Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AEBPB4873M अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. Manoj Choudhary, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gorav Avasthi, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hear

capital loss of Rs. 1,15,89,010/- and the same was set off against gains on sale of one more property sold for Rs. 2,51,00,000/-. The assessee contends that she has submitted sufficient details during the course of assessment proceedings. However, from the assessment order, it is seen that the AO passed an exparte order

JUHI BHANDARI, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Gains earned by the assessee was deposited under Capital\nGains Account scheme wherefrom the amount was paid to the builder [PB\n180-183]. The said document was shown to the Assessing Officer during the\ncourse of assessment proceedings. He was satisfied and hence, no adverse\nview was taken.\n8. That the Assessing Officer passed order disposing objections raised

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reopening the completed assessment is the same as it was while issuing the notice u/s 148 for the first time. It is submitted that the original assessment in the case of assessee was passed u/s 1433(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act, and the reasons recorded during the erstwhile re-assessment was “examination of capital gains

SMT. LAKSHMI AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-4(5), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: recording satisfaction for issuance of notice since the information is specific. Thus the reasons recorded for re-opening is on borrowed satisfaction and not on any satisfaction by the AO. The

reopening is sought of an assessment in a situation where the initial return is processed under section 143(1) of the Act, the Assessing Officer can form reasons to believe that income has escaped assessment by examining the very return and/or the documents accompanying the return. It is not necessary in such a case for the Assessing Officer to come

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

reopened vide issuance of notice u/s 148 of the Act. In response to such notice, assessee filed return of income declaring total income at Rs.1,51,660/-, which inter alia included capital gain earned by the assessee and claimed deduction u/s 54F. During the course of assessment

SHRI MADHO LAL SAINI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

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

assessment under section 144/147 of the IT Act by making additions of Rs. 4,24,14,300/- on account of undisclosed cash payment and Rs. 63,95,407/- on account of undisclosed long term capital gain in purchase / sale of land. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the ld. CIT (A) and also challenged the validity

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Capital Gain u/s.10(38) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n\n5.2 A notice u/s.148 was issued on 28.09.2016. However, no return/response\nwas received from the assessee. Thereafter, a final show cause notice\nmentioning the reason for reopening of the assessment

GOYAL VEGOILS LIMITED ,KASAR ,KOTA vs. DCIT , CIRCLE -2, KOTA

In the result ground no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

capital gain or the head profits and gains from business was a subject matter of consideration by the Assessing Officer during the original assessment proceedings leading to an order dated 12 October 2010. It would therefore, follow that the reopening

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

assessment. Since in this case specific verifiable information pointing out tax evasion was given by the DIT (Inv.) Kolkata. 8. On examination of details of tong Term Capital Gain earned, it was found that assessee has shown capital gain from the sale of shares of M/s. Twenty First Century India Ltd or Rs. 1, 34, 99,620/- during

ACIT, NCR BUILDING, JAIPUR vs. HANS RAJ AGARWAL, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR JAIPUR

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

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

reopening assessment. Information received from DDIT (Inv.) has already been examined and inquired into by respondent no.1 in the original assessment proceedings where after submitting various details with regard to details of investments, details of short term capital gains

BRAND INDIA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital raised during the year, was duly raised in the\nquestionnaire issued dated 04.11.2014 (Point No.8) (Copy at PB Page 15-16). The assessee duly\nreplied (along with the documentary evidences such as share application form, bank account\nstatement and financial statements of the applicants) for the same in reply dated 11.11.2014 and\n24.11.2014 (Copy at PB Page

ASHISH SHARMA,GOPAL PURA BYE - PASS JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, STATUE CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

capital gain of Rs. 10,60,074/-. The action of the Learned Assessing Officer is against the principles of natural justice as adequate opportunity was not provided. The Learned Assessing Officer had completed the assessment on guess work, conjecture and surmises. The Learned Assessing Officer has assumed the cost of acquisition at Rs. 1,00,000/- of plot without

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)

reopened and notice u/s 148 was issued on 29.09.2016. Details and information sought by AO were furnished and the assessment was finalized u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147, on 22.12.2017 assessing an income of Rs.13,50,560/- , thereby creating a demand of Rs.4,13,070/-, after making addition u/s 68 to the tune of Rs. 9,37,172/- by treating