KIRAN YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

section 50C to his notice. Further in the show cause notice proposed computation of capital gain was given. The assessee has requested for personal hearing on VC. However in the show cause notice it was clearly mentioned asunder: If required, after filing written reply you may request for personal hearing so as to make oral submissions or present your case

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 148 or to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for his assessment, for that assessment year" The assessee objected to such re-opening as it was hit by the first proviso to sec 147, whereby an assessment / re-assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the act is sought to be re-opened after lapse of four years

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

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

133, Panchratna, Opera House, Mumbai which return back by the postal authorities with the remarks ‘’not claim return to sender’’. Further on googal search, the same address is found to be belonged to Patel Manilal Maganlal & Sons, a angadia service provider i.e. courier agent’’ It is also noted that the AO in the assessment order has mentioned that the request

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)

133(6) to verify the genuineness of the claim and cannot proceed on surmises.” CIT vs Mukesh Ratilal Marolia (Bombay High Court) (Caselaws PB Pages 17-28) S.10(38)/69: Fact that a small amount invested in “penny” stocks gave rise to huge capital gains in a short period does not mean that the transaction is “bogus” if the documentation

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

133(6) to verify the genuineness of the claim and cannot proceed on surmises.” CIT vs Mukesh Ratilal Marolia (Bombay High Court) (Caselaws Paper Book Pages 17-28) S.10(38)/69: Fact that a small amount invested in “penny” stocks gave rise to huge capital gains in a short period does not mean that the transaction is “bogus

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S CHOKHI DHANI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly capital gain tax is leviable on compulsory acquisition of the land. In this connection it is submitted that the above said finding of the ld. AO was based on the enquiries made from the Tehsildar, Sanganer vide his letter dated 14.11.2019 and 15.11.2019 and also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S RIGID CONDUCTORS (RAJ.) PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly capital gain tax is leviable on compulsory acquisition of the land. In this connection it is submitted that the above said finding of the ld. AO was based on the enquiries made from the Tehsildar, Sanganer vide his letter dated 14.11.2019 and 15.11.2019 and also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S VISION ESTATES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly capital gain tax is leviable on compulsory acquisition of the land. In this connection it is submitted that the above said finding of the ld. AO was based on the enquiries made from the Tehsildar, Sanganer vide his letter dated 14.11.2019 and 15.11.2019 and also

DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX, LIC BUILDING vs. M/S GEE VEE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital asset within the meaning of section 2(14) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly capital gain tax is leviable on compulsory acquisition of the land. In this connection it is submitted that the above said finding of the ld. AO was based on the enquiries made from the Tehsildar, Sanganer vide his letter dated 14.11.2019 and 15.11.2019 and also

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

133(6) to verify the genuineness of the claim and cannot proceed on surmises.” CIT vs Mukesh Ratilal Marolia (Bombay High Court) S.10(38)/69: Fact that a small amount invested in “penny” stocks gave rise to huge capital gains in a short period does not mean that the transaction is “bogus” if the documentation and evidences cannot be faulted

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SANGEETA MANTRI, JAIPUR

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. ASHA JAIN, JAIPUR

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

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

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

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

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest

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

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

133(6) or otherwise, which shows that the appellant had received accommodation entry in the form of Long Term Capital Gain by making cash payment to the person or his agent/ associate involved in providing such accommodation entry. The aforesaid evidences/ copies of statement/ documents/ loose pipers may be submitted to this office latest