SMT. BIRMA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

ii) CIT vs. Rajesh Kumar Jalan (2006) 286 ITR 0274 (ITAT Gauhati) From a plain reading of sub-s. (2) of s. 54, it is clear that only s. 139 is mentioned in s. 54(2) in the context that the un-utilized portion of the capital gain on the sale of property used for residence should be deposited before

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.

142(1) of the Act has been issued along with questionnaire through ITBA/E- 3 Indira Giri vs. ITO mail on 24.07.2018 fixing the date of hearing on 08.08.2018. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted his reply online through e-filing portal. He has submitted copy of return of income along with computation of income, bank statements, balance sheets, sale

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

ii) The assessee shall be entitled to withdraw such amount in accordance with the scheme aforesaid. 11. A reading of the aforesaid Sub-Section would show that if a person has not furnished the return of the previous year within the time allowed under Sub-Section (1) i.e. before 31st day of July of the Assessment Year, the assessee

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

ACIT, KOTA vs. MANGALAM CEMENT LTD., KOTA

ii) of section 32(1) and thus has rightly claimed and been allowed additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia). (b) The payment of land tax and service tax was made in the year under consideration against the demand and therefore same is otherwise allowable u/s 43B. ACIT, Circle-1, Kota vs. M/s Mangalam Cement Ltd. Kota 4. The AO thereafter

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\n\n9\nITA No. 301 and others /JP/2025 & CO No. 2 and others-JP-2025\nDCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n\n6.\nWhile search and seizure action u/s.132

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

ii) an incorrect claim, if such incorrect claim is apparent from any information in the return; (iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year forwhich set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139; (iv) disallowance of expenditure [or increase in income] indicated in the audit

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related

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

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

142(1) of the Act was issued on 11-08-\n2021 and certain details/explanations were called for. In response to these\nnotices, the assessee submitted requisite details/explanation, which have\nbeen examined.\n6. While search and seizure action u/s.132 of the Act 1961 in the case\nof various persons of Dewan Group, various bunch of documents and loose\npapers related