SUMIT GOEL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

In the result,the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

Section 132 (4) of the I.T. Act, the Tribunal’s view that only the basis of such retracted statement, addition could not be justified without any other material admissible in evidence, warrants no interference as it is not a substantial question of law. In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Harjeev Aggarwal reported

ITO, STATUE CIRCLE vs. SUNITA MITTAL, GOPAL PURA

section 268A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), for laying down monetary\nlimits and other conditions for filing of departmental appeals before Income Tax Appellate\nTribunal (ITAT), High Courts and SLPs/appeals before Supreme Court.\n\n2. Several references have been received by the Board that in large number of cases where\norganised tax-evasion scam is noticed through

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-4, KOTA vs. SHRI PRAHALAD SINGH , KOTA

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue and the C

Gain on sale of land, holding that the land sold by the assessee was not a capital asset. Grounds of assessee’s C.O.: 1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in upholding the validity of notice issued u/s 148 even when the notice is not issued to all the legal heirs of the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), , AJMER vs. ASHISH AGARWAL & SONS (HUF), AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.” 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld. Ar Of The Assessee Has Raised An Objection Of Maintainability Of The Appeal Of The Revenue Due To The Tax Effect Not Exceeding Rs. 20 Lacs As Per The Cbdt Circle No. 3 Of 2018 Dated 11Th July

capital gain on shares and surrender thereof for taxation, was not voluntarily made during the course of survey proceedings.” 2 ITO Vs. Ashish Agarwal ii) The appellant craves to add, amend, alter, delete or modify the above grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 2. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), AJMER vs. SMT. STUTI AGARWAL, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

capital gain on shares and surrender thereof for taxation, was not voluntarily made during the course of survey proceedings.” ii) The appellant craves to add, amend, alter, delete or modify the above grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 2 ITO Vs. Stuti Agarwal 2. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR of the assessee