DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. JYOTI AGARWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

capital gain on sale of shares as undisclosed income and offered the same for taxation. In the return of income filed in response to notice U/s 153A of the Act, the assessee declared the total income of Rs.1,47,31,890/- and agricultural income of Rs. 14,20,207/- including the surrendered income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. SMT. MALTI AGARWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

capital gain on sale of shares as undisclosed income and offered the same for taxation. In the return of income filed in response to notice U/s 153A of the Act, the assessee declared the total income of Rs.2,95,52,060/- and agricultural income of Rs. 14,20,207/- including the surrendered income

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

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

Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment of any other person (Validity of) - Assessment year 2007- 08 - In appellate proceedings, Tribunal recorded a finding that satisfaction for initiation of proceedings under section 153C was recorded by Assessing officer on 02-02-2015 - Tribunal thus opined that Assessing Officer could not have initiated and passed

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

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

gain for the purposes of assessment under section 115J. Both judgements are rendered in the context of Section 115J which does not contain a provision analogous to sub sections (4) of section 115JA or (5) of section 115JB of the Act. Thus while an assessment u/s 115J would be concluded exclusively on the basis of the book profits as adjusted

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

gain for the purposes of assessment\nunder section 115J. Both judgements are rendered in the context of\nSection 115J which does not contain a provision analogous to sub\nsections (4) of section 115JA or (5) of section 115JB of the Act. Thus\nwhile an assessment u/s 115J would be concluded exclusively on the\nbasis of the book profits as adjusted

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

capital gain on sale of property - Assessee made a claim before\nAssessing Officer that value adopted or assessed by stamp valuation authority\nwas higher than fair market value - Value adopted by stamp valuation authority\nhad not ever been disputed by assessee in any appeal or revision or otherwise to\nany other authority or Court as referred to in section

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.

gain for the purposes of assessment under section 115J. Both judgements are rendered in the context of Section 115J which does not contain a provision analogous to sub- sections (4) of section 115JA or (5) of section 115JB of the Act. Thus while an assessment u/s 115J would be concluded exclusively on the basis of the book profits as adjusted

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.

gain for the purposes of assessment under section 115J. Both judgements are rendered in the context of Section 115J which does not contain a provision analogous to sub- sections (4) of section 115JA or (5) of section 115JB of the Act. Thus while an assessment u/s 115J would be concluded exclusively on the basis of the book profits as adjusted

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

gain for the purposes of assessment under section 115J. Both judgements are rendered in the context of Section 115J which does not contain a provision analogous to sub sections (4) of section 115JA or (5) of section 115JB of the Act. Thus while an assessment u/s 115J would be concluded exclusively on the basis of the book profits as adjusted

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

Capital gains - Special\nprovision for computation of full value of consideration in certain cases [Reference\nto Valuation Officer] - Assessment year 2009-10 - Assessee earned short term\ncapital gain on sale of property - Assessee made a claim before Assessing Officer\nthat value adopted or assessed by stamp valuation authority was higher than fair\nmarket value - Value adopted by stamp valuation authority

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Capital gains - Special\nprovision for computation of full value of consideration in certain cases [Reference\nto Valuation Officer] Assessment year 2009-10 - Assessee earned short term\ncapital gain on sale of property - Assessee made a claim before Assessing Officer\nthat value adopted or assessed by stamp valuation authority was higher than fair\nmarket value - Value adopted by stamp valuation authority

BALVEER SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(3) JAIPUR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

Capital gain arise on the sale of the property has not been\nshown by the assessee. Thus, I have reason that income of Rs. 11,04,606/- for\nthe year under consideration has escaped assessment within the meaning of\nsection 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Accordingly a notice u/s 148 was issued on\n29/03/201,9 which was duly served

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

Capital gains - Special\nprovision for computation of full value of consideration in certain cases [Reference\nto Valuation Officer] - Assessment year 2009-10 - Assessee earned short term\ncapital gain on sale of property - Assessee made a claim before Assessing Officer\nthat value adopted or assessed by stamp valuation authority was higher than fair\nmarket value - Value adopted by stamp valuation authority

HEMA KANWAR NARENDRA SINGH RATHOD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

207, Gomes Defence Colony, Central Circle-2, Avenue-4, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. AASPR 0262 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S.R. Sharma, CA & Shri R.K. Bhatra, CA. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT. lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing

HEMA KANWAR NARENDRA SINGH RATHOD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

207, Gomes Defence Colony, Central Circle-2, Avenue-4, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. AASPR 0262 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S.R. Sharma, CA & Shri R.K. Bhatra, CA. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Anup Singh, Addl. CIT. lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing

SHRI NIRMAL KUMAR KEDIA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

capital assets, therefore, whatever gain was assessable on sale of such plots is liable to be taxed under the head capital gains as against the income from business. Accordingly, the A.O. was not justified in bringing to tax such income from sale of plots held by the assessee as capital asset under the head business income. From the record

SHRI NIRMAK KUMAR KEDIA,,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

capital assets, therefore, whatever gain was assessable on sale of such plots is liable to be taxed under the head capital gains as against the income from business. Accordingly, the A.O. was not justified in bringing to tax such income from sale of plots held by the assessee as capital asset under the head business income. From the record

SHRI NIRMAL KUMAR KEDIA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

capital assets, therefore, whatever gain was assessable on sale of such plots is liable to be taxed under the head capital gains as against the income from business. Accordingly, the A.O. was not justified in bringing to tax such income from sale of plots held by the assessee as capital asset under the head business income. From the record