ITO, WARD-1, BHARATPUR vs. SHRI MADAN LAL SHARMA, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed statistically and

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

Capital Gains, eligible to tax, in the hands of the assessee. 3.3. Even ld. AO, in his remand report, submitted to the ld. CIT(A) accepted the fact that the property was never transferred to the assessee. In this regard, the remand report of the ld. AO, reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) at Page 5-6 of his order

SHRI MADAN LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, , BHARATPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed statistically and

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

Capital Gains, eligible to tax, in the hands of the assessee. 3.3. Even ld. AO, in his remand report, submitted to the ld. CIT(A) accepted the fact that the property was never transferred to the assessee. In this regard, the remand report of the ld. AO, reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) at Page 5-6 of his order

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

Section 80IA (8) of the Act. In CIT vs. Thiagarajar Mills Ltd. in Tax Case(Appeal) Nos.68 to 70 of 2010 dated 07-06-2010, it was held that captive consumption of power generated by the assessee from its own power plant would enable the assessee to derive profit and gains by working out the cost of such consumption

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

Section. It is not in dispute that the assessee had traded in penny stock scrip viz Comfort Intech Ltd. and obtained accommodation entry in the form of Short Term Capital Gain. Even if assuming the said company M/s. Comfort Intech Ltd is not treated as penny stock company then the assessee who had earned short term capital gain of Rs.10.05

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

ALOK KUMAR JAIN ,PEARL PLEASURE vs. ACIT CIR-6, JAIPUR, NEW CERNTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BHAGWAN DASS ROAD, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN,

Bench: Him.

capital gain has been duly established and substantiated, therefore, onus of the Assessee has been duly discharged. Thus, facts of the case of Assessee is clearly distinguishable. Alok Kumar Jain vs. ACIT/DCIT Para Argument by department in their written Rejoinder by the Assessee-Appellant submission filed during hearing on 16.01.2025 iv. Pr CIT vs Bikram Singh 2017 85 This judgment

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

104 CCH379(Bom.HC)(2019).\nThus, cannot be said that it is an irregularity curable u/s.292B—\n(h) In the case of Saraf Gramodyog Sansthan vs. ITO 108 ITD 115(Agra)it has\nbeen held that Further, AO had referred to wrong bank account number in the\nreasons recorded by him—Sec. 292B cannot take care of any mistake in\nrecording

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

104 CCH379(Bom.HC)(2019).\nThus, cannot be said that it is an irregularity curable u/s.292B—\n(h) In the case of Saraf Gramodyog Sansthan vs. ITO 108 ITD 115(Agra)it has\nbeen held that Further, AO had referred to wrong bank account number in the\nreasons recorded by him—Sec. 292B cannot take care of any mistake in\nrecording

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

104 CCH379(Bom.HC)(2019).\r\nThus, cannot be said that it is an irregularity curable u/s.292B—\r\n(h)In the case of SarafGramodyogSansthan vs. ITO108 ITD 115(Agra)it has\r\nbeen held that Further, AO had referred to wrong bank account number in the\r\nreasons recorded by him—Sec. 292B cannot take care of any mistake

SUWALKA AND SUWALKA PROPERTIES AND BUILDERS PVT LTD,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, KOTA, KOTA, RAJASTHAN

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

gain has accrued to the assessee. CIT (A) further held that funds received by the assessee is unaccounted income of the assessee and chargeable to tax u/s 68 of the act. On the matrix as held by the Honorable Delhi high court the above issue falls within the scope of the provision of section

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

gains, nor is it income from other sources' because the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been explained or satisfactorily explained. Therefore, in these cases, the source

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KALAWATI SHARMA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalincome Tax Officer, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

capital gains u/s 10(38) of the Act by establishing the genuineness of transaction of purchase and sale of shares and satisfying the requisite conditions specified therein and the gains so arising on sale of shares therefore has been rightly claimed as exempt u/s 10(38) of the Act. Accordingly, in the facts and circumstances of the case

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

104 to 111 of CLPB] has held that as per sub-section (5) of Sec. 115JB, the application of other provisions are open, except if specifically barred by the section itself. Hence, considering the said provision, it has been held that since there is no provision in the Act to prevent the assessee from claiming indexed cost of acquisition

PHOOL CHAND,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

section 54 of the Act by filing of return of income. It is a fact that the appellant had not claimed the deduction u/s 54 either in original return u/s 139(1), revised return u/s 139(5), by filing return u/s 148 or during course of assessment proceedings. Hence, I agree with the findings of the AO that the facts

RAMA SHANKER PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

gain, he cannot simply dispute fact that assessee did not file return—\nEntire reasoning recorded by AO for initiation of reassessment proceeding and\nissuance of notice under section 148 was on wrong and incorrect facts that\nassessee has never filed return of income, and in fact, it was filed—Initiation of\nreassessment proceeding u/s.147 and notice under section

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

104) Delhi ITAT. Under section 11(1)(a) income derived from property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes to the extent to which such income is applied to such purposes in India and, where any such income is accumulated or set apart for application to such purposes in India, to the extent to which the income

SHRI MANOHAR LAL CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

gains arising from the transfer of a long term capital asset being buildings or lands appurtenant thereto and being a residential house”. It was accordingly submitted that there is no requirement under law that there has to be actual usage of the house for residential purposes and consequent income offered from such house property to qualify for claim of deduction