NANAG RAM MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed as indicated\nhereinabove

154 r.w.s.250 was passed on 13.12.2024,\nclarifying the deduction amount.\nc) The assessee, in good faith, pursued the matter through grievance redressal\nmechanisms and rectification applications before approaching the Hon'ble\nITAT. As a result, the time elapsed in exhausting the available legal remedies.\n4\nITA NO. 1398/JP/2024\nSHRI NANAG RAM MEENA VS ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR\nd) The delay

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 gain in the year under consideration, the fact remaining that the possession of the land has still not been handed over to the appellant till date. (xi) In search assessments, any undisclosed income, which can ultimately be added, is only to the extent of any unrecorded assets/material found or any incriminating document found as representing undisclosed income earned. Further

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 gain in the year under consideration, the fact remaining that the possession of the land has still not been handed over to the appellant till date. (xi) In search assessments, any undisclosed income, which can ultimately be added, is only to the extent of any unrecorded assets/material found or any incriminating document found as representing undisclosed income earned. Further

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 gain in the year under consideration, the fact remaining that the possession of the land has still not been handed over to the appellant till date. (xi) In search assessments, any undisclosed income, which can ultimately be added, is only to the extent of any unrecorded assets/material found or any incriminating document found as representing undisclosed income earned. Further

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 gain in the year under consideration, the fact remaining that the possession of the land has still not been handed over to the appellant till date. (xi) In search assessments, any undisclosed income, which can ultimately be added, is only to the extent of any unrecorded assets/material found or any incriminating document found as representing undisclosed income earned. Further

NIKHIL KHANDELWAL,KOTA vs. ITO WD-2(2), KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Hearing.”

capital gain which in contravention with the provision of Income Tax Act, 1961. Such denial being invalid in law and deserves to be quashed. 2. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the denial of rectification under section 154

BHARATPUR ROYAL FAMILY RELIGIOUS & CEREMONIAL TRUST,BHARATPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

In the result, we upheld the order of the ld PCIT in exercise of his powers u/s 263 in setting aside the order so passed by the AO and the grounds of appeal taken by the assessee are hereby dismissed

154 of the Act. Under these facts, this plea of the assessee that the receipts cannot be taxed under the year under appeal is devoid of any merit hence rejected.” 22. In the aforesaid decision, the Coordinate Bench, at para 6.2 of its order, has held that there is no dispute that when the assessment order was passed, the trust

KULDEEP SINGH SHEKHAWAT,KOTA vs. ITO W-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Gagan Goyalkuldeep Singh Shekhawat, 11, Samridhi Traders, Police Line, Gopal Vihar, Baran Road-324001 Pan No. Araps0973M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Kota …... Respondent

Capital Gains Account Scheme, can be made till the date of belated return under section 139(4) or revised return under section 139(5) as the wordings used in section 54(2) is "section 139", and not section 139(1), which covers all sub-sections of section 139". The Supreme Court, in the context of interpretation of provisions of 276CC

RAJRANI SINGHAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

section 45(1) of Income Tax\nAct' 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the\nhead \"CAPITAL GAIN\".\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE”\nas “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O.\nduring assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154

GANPATLAL AGARWAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

section 45(1) of Income Tax\nAct' 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the\nhead "CAPITAL GAIN”.\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE”\nas “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O.\nduring assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154

GANPATLAL AGARWAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act’ 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a CAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head “CAPITAL GAIN”. Whereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE” as “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154

RAJRANI SINGHAL,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act’ 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a CAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head “CAPITAL GAIN”. Whereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE” as “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154

GANPATLAL AGARWAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act’ 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a CAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head “CAPITAL GAIN”. Whereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE” as “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154

GANPATLAL AGARWAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

section 45(1) of Income Tax\nAct' 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the\nhead \"CAPITAL GAIN\".\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE”\nas “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O.\nduring assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154

VINODKUMAR AGARWAL,AJMER vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act\n1961 states \"Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET\" shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head\n\"CAPITAL GAIN\".\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered \"SALE VALUE\" as\n\"CAPITAL GAIN\", whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during\nassessment proceedings/u/sec. 154

RAJRANI SINGHAL,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed for statistical purposes

section 45(1) of Income Tax\nAct' 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\nCAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the\nhead \"CAPITAL GAIN”.\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE”\nas “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O.\nduring assessment proceedings / u/sec. 154

RAJRANI SINGHAL,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\r\nallowed for statistical purposes

section 45(1) of Income Tax\r\nAct' 1961 states “Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a\r\nCAPITAL ASSET” shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the\r\nhead \"CAPITAL GAIN”.\r\nWhereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered “SALE VALUE”\r\nas “CAPITAL GAIN”, whereas complete details were filed to A.O.\r\nduring assessment

VINODKUMAR AGARWAL,AJMER vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 45(1) of Income Tax Act 1961 states "Any profits or against arising from the transfer of a CAPITAL ASSET" shall be chargeable to Income Tax under the head "CAPITAL GAIN". Whereas the A.O. & CIT(A) both have considered "SALE VALUE" as "CAPITAL GAIN", whereas complete details were filed to A.O. during assessment proceedings/u/sec. 154