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

142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and acted\r\nupon for entertaining claim raised under section 80P provided further\r\nproceedings in relation to such assessments are pending in statutory hierarchy\r\nof adjudication in terms of provisions of Act. In the case of ASR Engg. &\r\nProjects Ltd. [2019] 111 taxmann.com 49 (Hyderabad- Trib.), the ITAT

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)

142(1) dated 26.06.2018, a detailed questionnaire was sent to the assessee. Assessment was completed, under section 143(3) of ITA, vide order, dated 12.12,2018, wherein, the claim made by the assessee under section 54B for an amount of Rs. 1,47,42,303 was rejected by the ld. AO. On the following grounds: 3 Guruvendra Singh vs. ACIT

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

1) 59[Subject to the provisions of sub-section (4), where, in the case of an assessee being an individual or a Hindu undivided family], the capital gain arises from the transfer of any long-term capital asset, not being a 60residential house (hereafter in this section referred to as the original asset), and the assessee has, within a period

SMT. RENU JAIN,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 5(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the sole ground of appeal is allowed

capital gain on the sale of property used for residence should be deposited before the date of furnishing the return of the Income-tax under section 139 of the Income-tax Act. Section 139 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, cannot be meant only section 139(1), but it means all sub-sections of section 139 of the Income

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 are attracted. Accordingly, the notice u/s 142(1) of the Act was issued on 24-01-2022. The assessee in response to notice (supra) revised his computation of 16 KIRAN YADAV VS ITO, WARED 1(3), JAIPUR income as well as calculation on long term capital gain

SANJIV PRAKASHAN,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

capital gain and accumulation of income u/s.11(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 deserves to be deleted." Original order in this case was passed u/s 143(1) - AO made disallowance for PF/ESI by passing rectification order u/s 154- held AO was not justified – appeal of assessee allowed 65-66 8 Principal Commissioner of Income-tax v. SPPL Property Management

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

Gain aroused in the case\nof the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, the AO issued a number of\nnotices to the assessee which are stated as under:-\nSr. No. Notice u/s Date of Notice Remarks\n1. 148 27.03.2019 No compliance\n2. 142(1) 27.08.2019 No compliance\n3. 142(1) 04.10.2019 No compliance\n4. 142(1) 11.10.2019 No compliance\n5. Show

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n\n2.\nWhether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SARITA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2.\nWhether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. USHA BANKA, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA BANKA, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. PRIYA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR , JAIPUR vs. USHA BANKA, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. TRILOK DEWAN, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2.\nWhether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SARITA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. PRIYA DEWAN, SIKAR

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

Capital Gains on account of unexplained\ncredits u/s 68 of the IT Act 1961.\n2. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld.\nCIT(A) is justified in deleting the addition of 2,05,753/- made by the AO on account\nof unexplained expenditure for commission to acquire such accommodation\nentries.\n3. The applicant