BIRENDRA SINGH NIRBHAY,SIRSI ROAD JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO WARD 3(1) JAIPUR, NCRB INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain and added Rs.123680/-\nBrief facts of the order:\nThe assessee aggrieved with the order of the Ld AO has filed appeal with CIT (A)\non 12/12/2017 The CIT(A) under faceless regime had issued notice of hearing on\n01/11/2022 and 27/07/2023. The assessee has complied with the notice and\nsubmitted its detailed reply incorporating the facts and relevant

FEDERATION OF RAJASTHAN TRADE AND INDUSTRY,JAIPUR vs. ITO-EXEMPTION WARD-2, JAIPUR

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)

capital gain was calculated by the AO to the tune of Rs.57,50,287/-. Moreover, the return of income was filed after the due date invoking the provisions of section u/s 139(3). Hence, I find no merit in the contention. Accordingly, I am inclined to interfere with the decision of the AO taken on this ground. Ground

DCIT, CC-3, JAIPUR vs. SMT. JYOTI FALOR, JAIPUR

Capital Gains shown by him as well as by other family members are bogus accommodation entries availed by the assessee and his family members, the said statement itself is an incriminating material sufficient for framing the assessment under section 153A of the Act. The ld. CIT D/R placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

DCIT, C.C. -03, JAIPUR vs. SHRI TEJENDER KUMAR FALOR, JAIPUR

Capital Gains shown by him as well as by other family members are bogus accommodation entries availed by the assessee and his family members, the said statement itself is an incriminating material sufficient for framing the assessment under section 153A of the Act. The ld. CIT D/R placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S BITTHAL DAS PARWAL, HUF, JAIPUR

Capital Gains shown by him as well as by other family members are bogus accommodation entries availed by the assessee and his family members, the said statement itself is an incriminating material sufficient for framing the assessment under section 153A of the Act. The ld. CIT D/R placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SAROJ PARWAL, JAIPUR

Capital Gains shown by him as well as by other family members are bogus accommodation entries availed by the assessee and his family members, the said statement itself is an incriminating material sufficient for framing the assessment under section 153A of the Act. The ld. CIT D/R placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S HARI NARAIN PARWAL, HUF, JAIPUR

Capital Gains shown by him as well as by other family members are bogus accommodation entries availed by the assessee and his family members, the said statement itself is an incriminating material sufficient for framing the assessment under section 153A of the Act. The ld. CIT D/R placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case

HARISH SHARMA HUF,B-1, PATODIYA MARG, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 10(38) in respect of capital gain arising from sale of shares, in view of fact that financial worth of said company was meager and, moreover, there was abnormal rise in price of shares, it could be concluded that assessee introduced her own unaccounted money in garb of long term capital gain and, thus, claim raised

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

capital gains, on sale of land by the assessee to his two daughter-in-laws, by way of enhancement of ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 12 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. income in terms of provisions of section 251

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

capital gains, on sale of land by the assessee to his two daughter-in-laws, by way of enhancement of ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 12 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. income in terms of provisions of section 251

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

capital gains, on sale of land by the assessee to his two daughter-in-laws, by way of enhancement of ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 12 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. income in terms of provisions of section 251

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

capital gains, on sale of land by the assessee to his two daughter-in-laws, by way of enhancement of ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 12 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. income in terms of provisions of section 251

DR. ASHA MATHUR,GUJRAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONR OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

gains and other sources. The assessee has filed its e-return of income on 10/7/2015 declaring total income of Rs. 5,71,57,170/-. The Assessing Officer made assessment U/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act) on 23/12/2016 at total income of Rs. 6,84,93,110/- and made addition ITA 769/JP/2017_

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

capital gains tax, but that cannot be a case of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. If it has claimed any exemption after disclosing the relevant basic facts and under ignorance of the provisions of the Act of 1961, and not offered that amount for tax, in such cases, penalty should not be imposed

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

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

capital gains.\nAggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the\nCommissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jaipur–4 “CIT(A)”. The appeal was allowed vide\norder dated 31.12.2024. The Id. CIT(A) deleted the addition made under Section 153A\non the ground that the assessment for the said year had already attained finality and no\nincriminating material

M/S TRIMURTY BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1194/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S Trimurty Buildcon Pvt. Ltd., Cuke I.T.O. Vs. 601, Geeta Enclave, Vinobha Ward 2(2) Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabct 7285 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Rohan Sogani (Ca) & Shri Rajeev Sogani (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 23/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/04/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)- I, Jaipur Dated 13/09/2018 For The A.Y. 2013-14 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. (A) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Enhancing The Income By Disallowing Interest Expenditure Of Rs. 53,78,282. The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Illegal, Unjustified, Arbitrary & Against The Facts Of The Case. Relief May Please Be Granted By Allowing The Said Expenditure Of Rs. 53,78,282. (B) In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Exercising The Powers Of Enhancement Under Section 251(1)(A).

Section 28 which falls under the head Profits and Gains from Business and Profession. 1.27 The borrowings from Shri Udai Kant Mishra, on which interest expenses were incurred by the assessee company in the current and the preceding years, were all parked in various Fixed Assets, at different points of time during the current and the preceding years. None

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

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

capital gains. IV. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jaipur–4 “CIT(A)”. The appeal was allowed vide order dated 31.12.2024. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made under Section 153A on the ground that the assessment for the said year had already attained finality and no incriminating

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

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

capital gains. IV. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jaipur–4 “CIT(A)”. The appeal was allowed vide order dated 31.12.2024. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition made under Section 153A on the ground that the assessment for the said year had already attained finality and no incriminating

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.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory