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)

260 (Delhi) also hold that in order to justify the assumption of jurisdiction under Section 153C of the Act the documents seized must be incriminating and must relate to each of the AYs whose assessments are sought to be reopened. Since the satisfaction note forms the basis for initiating the proceedings under 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.

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

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.

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

TARA SONI,DAUSA vs. ITO WARD, DAUSA, DAUSA

In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant stands allowed with no orders\nas to cost

Capital Gains.”\nc)\nBench)\nBhavesh Shambhulal Somani, ITA No. 2263/Ahd/2015, (ITAT Ahmedabad\n“Further even on merits also assessee has proved genuineness of the transaction by\nproviding necessary details and documents in the form of contract note, demat a/c, bank\nstatement and NSE details and proved that the impugned transaction was not entered\nthrough accommodation entry provider namely Mahasagar Securities

ALOK KUMAR JAIN ,PEARL PLEASURE vs. ACIT CIR-6, JAIPUR, NEW CERNTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BHAGWAN DASS ROAD, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN,

Bench: Him.

Section 10(38) of the Act as far as claim of exemption of capital gain is concerned. Moreover, agricultural claim is also justified and no further addition required, when after due verification, the basis of exemption is found correct and justified. Since the very basis of proceeding is non-existent and found to be non-existent despite there being lack

SH. KESAR LAL BAIRWA,A-24, VARUN COLONY, MANDARA STAND, NEW SANGANER ROAD, MANSAROVAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

260/- per sq. yd. 5 Kesar Lal Bairwa, Jaipur. but the Hon’ble High Court vide order dated 22.03.1999 reduced it to Rs. 100/- per sq. yard and additionally directed to consider allotment of 25% of the developed land. The Hon’ble Supreme Court vide para 57 of its order approved the compensation

LAL SINGH NADERIA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

section 50C (40% share) Rs. 77,67,931/- Less: 1. Indexed cost of acquisition as shown by the assessee. Rs. 2,38,853/- 2. Expesnes on account of patta and registration charges paid to JDA Rs. 9,53,640/- Long term capital gain Rs. 65,75,438/- Deduction u/s 54 Investment in new asset Rs. 32,09,810/- (Purchase consideration

TEJ PAL SINGH,REENGUS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NEEM KA THANA, NEEM KA THANA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Me That The Capital Gain Earned On This Land Acquired By Nhai Was Exempt In Terms Of Provision Section 10 Sub-Section (37) Of The Act. He Drew My Attention To The Relevant Provision Of Section 10(37) Of The Act As Under:-

260 per sq. meters which were acquired by National Highway Authority and compensation amounting to Rs.5,89,563/- received by the assessee during the impugned assessment year. Learned counsel for the assessee contended before me that the capital gain earned on this land acquired by NHAI was exempt in terms of provision Section

MUSTAFA KATTHAWALA,KOTA vs. DCIT ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM\nआयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 1156/JPR/2024\nनिर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16\nMustafa Katthawala\nProp. Shakti Steels, Near Reliance\nPetrol Pump Jhalawar Road, IPIA\nKota.-324005.\nबनाम | The DCIT/ACIT,\nVs.\nCircle-2,\nKota.\nस्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AGPPK5043C\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Devang Gargieya, Adv.\nराजस्व की ओर से / Reven

section 45(3) are applicable in this case and\nassessee is liable to liable to pay tax on long term capital gain of\nRs 1.71.87.500 (12.50% of 13,75,00,000/-) as per provision of\nsection 46(3) of the Income Tax Act.\n3.4 Further, a show cause notice was issued to the assessee on\n10/03/2023 fixing the date

SMT. SUMAN CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Capital Gains'. Ld. AO in that proceeding also noted the assessee deposited a sum of Rs. 10,39,513.13 in the bank account maintained in the HDFC, Ashok Marg, Jaipur account. Since the assessee has not furnished any explanation of above cash deposit made in the bank accounts and the source thereof therefore, that amount was treated as unexplained cash

SUVA LAL PAHARIA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(3), JAIPUR

Capital Gain and also erred in not giving the claim/deduction u/s 54. The Ld. AO\nand CIT(A)also erred in not considering the evidences, vital facts and material available\non record in their true perspective and sense. Hence the addition so made by the Id. AO\nand confirmed by the Id. CIT(A) is also being contrary

SHRI ATUL KOCHAR,JAIPUR vs. PRCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

260 sq ft building of Rs. 1,04,000/-. It was submitted that all the expenditure have been claimed to have been incurred in F.Y 1988-89 and thereafter, after indexation, the same has been claimed as deduction while computing capital gains by the assessee. It was submitted that in support of the cost of improvement/construction, the assessee has submitted

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, INCOME TAX OFFICE vs. SUPREME POLYMERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the results the appeal of the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 189/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2015-16 DCIT, Central Circle-03, Jaipur बनाम Vs. Supreme Polymers Pvt. Ltd. 137-138, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACCS 5773 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Gaurav Nahata, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT, Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

capital gains etc. in lieu of cash received by him and that it had also provided one-time entry of certain amount towards share application money to assessee-company through a broker and such transaction was not genuine - Assessing Officer made addition under section 68 to income of assessee on account of same -It was noted that Tribunal had noted

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

Section 14A of the Act can\nbe made if the assessee had not earned any exempt income? - HELD THAT:- A\nperusal of the Memorandum of the Finance Bill, 2022 reveals that it explicitly stipulates\nthat the amendment made to Section 14A will take effect from 1st April, 2022 and will\napply in relation to the assessment year

MANOHAR LAL ALWANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

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

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

gain of the assessee. 4. Aggrieved from the said action of the Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Apropos to the grounds so raised the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is reiterated here in below:- “3. I have carefully considered the facts of the case, assessment order dated 26.12.2017 passed under

SANTOSH BHANSALI HUF,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result notice issued u/s

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Gagan Goyalsantosh Bhansali Huf, D-79, Patrakar Colony, Tilak Marg, Shanti Path, Jaipur 302004 Pan No. Aaohs6943N ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 6(1), Jaipur …... Respondent

260/-. Ultimately, the case of the assessee was assessed at Rs. 3,72,36,460/- after adding the amount of Rs. 1,40,60,000/- being total consideration of 76,000 equity shares of M/s. Lactose (India) Ltd. and 2,81,200/- being commission paid towards commission paid u/s. 69C of the Act. The assessee being aggrieved with the same

J.K.V. STONEX,KISHANGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KISHANGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 143(1) had been issued In the case of Raymond Woolen Mills 236 ITR 34 (SC), Hon'ble Supreme Court Of India held that it is only to be seen whether there was a prima facie case for reopening or not, sufficiency of reasons not to be seen. I find that the facts of the case laws relied upon

SUNIL CHABLANI,AJMER, RAJASTHAN vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

Capital Gain in the hands of the assessee. Penalty proceedings\nu/s 270A of the Act is initiated on this issue for underreporting of income.\nFurther, the assessee has purchased an immovable property i.e. Flat no. A-1001,\nA Wing, Priyanka Blossom Apartment, Nashik on 31.05.2018 at the consideration\nof Rs.38,20,000/- (stamp value) and claimed the deduction