DCIT,C-7, JAIPUR vs. BHARAT MOHAN RATURI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed and that of the C

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 413/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2013-14 The DCIT Circle-7 Jaipur cuke Vs. Shri Bharat Mohan Raturi 161, Indira Colony, Bani Park Jaipur 302 015 (Raj) LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANPR 7066G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 2/JP/2023 (Arising out of vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 413/JP/2022 ) fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2013-14 Shri Bharat Mohan Raturi 161, Indira

302 015 (Raj) Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANPR 7066G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Anil Goya, CA & Shri Anurag Goya, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Mrs. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 20/04/2023 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date

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

302 012\nबनाम\nVs.\nThe ITO\nWard 3(1)\nJaipur\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nस्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ABXPN 5973 Η\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे/Assesseeby :Shri Deepak Sharma, CA\nराजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Shri Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/09/2025\nउदघोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement: : 09/10/2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER: RATHOD

SITA DEVI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD-4(1), JAIPUR

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

302 2016 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAUPA 7450 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri C.M. Batwara, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 06/09/2022 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 18 /10/2022 vkns

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed

302/- under the head “ short term capital gains.” 8. In this regard, the assessee has raised a preliminary objection stating that the assessment was reopened on the ground that the assessee has made an investment in time deposit however, no such addition was finally made and the addition was made towards capital gains and income from other sources

CHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

302 001 PAN No. ADXPJ 2237Q ...... Appellant Vs. Dy. Commissioner Income Tax, Circle- 1, Jaipur …...Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, CA, Ld. AR Respondent by : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Joint CIT, Ld. DR Date of hearing : 26/02/2025 Date of pronouncement : 13/03/2025 O R D E R PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order

SHRI RAM NARAIN YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-2, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

section 50C, indexation cost of acquisition and long term capital gain on each of the transactions constituted a tangible material for the AO to form the belief that income assessable to tax in the long term capital gain has escaped assessment. At the time of formation of belief that income assessable to tax has escaped assessment

SHRI RAM NARAIN YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-2, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for

section 50C, indexation cost of acquisition and long term capital gain on each of the transactions constituted a tangible material for the AO to form the belief that income assessable to tax in the long term capital gain has escaped assessment. At the time of formation of belief that income assessable to tax has escaped assessment

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-3, JAIPUR vs. SHRI GAURAV BAGARIA, JAIPUR

capital gains was claimed as exempt under section 10(38) - Assessing Officer having found that alleged purchaser of shares from assessee- was engaged in fraudulent billing activities, treated transaction of shares as bogus and accordingly denied exemption under section 10(38) - Whether since entire proof of purchase and sale of these shares were found in books of account of assessee

YOGESH DAS,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

capital gains in the returns of income filed u/s 139 and 148 of the Act is devoid of any merit as it is noted that the returns of income were filed with the help of a professional and not by the appellant itself. Even otherwise, it a trite law that ignorance of law is no excuse. (vii) The contention

VIRENDRA SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, ITA No. 302/JP/2017 is dismissed and ITA No

302 & 303/JP/2017 5 Birendra Singh & Surendra Singh Vs. ITO 5.3.2 I have considered the above mentioned fact. It would be worthwhile to reproduce the provision of section 54B for the sake of convenience as under:- 54B. Capital gain

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

302/- after considering statutory deduction u/s 24(a) of the Act) and a demand of Rs.54,03,271/- was created. Against this intimation, assessee filed an application u/s 154 and in this proceedings, assessee filed a detailed reply dated 28.08.2013 explaining how its income is exempt from tax under the Act. 3 Bharatpur Royal Family Religious & Ceremonial Trust Moti Mahal

SHREYA SINGHVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalshreya Singhvi, 80, Kiran Marg, Suraj Nagar Jaipur 302 006 Pan No.: Agmps 2639D ...... Appellant Vs.

302 006 PAN No.: AGMPS 2639D ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Jaipur ...... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Rajeev Sogani, CA, Ld. AR Respondent by : Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT- Ld. DR Date of hearing : 19/03/2025 Date of pronouncement : 25/03/2025 O R D E R PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of NFAC

HINDUSTAN SALES INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

302 001 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAAFH 9961 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Rajeev Sogani, CA & Shri Rohan Sogani, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 28/09/2022 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date

NARESH KUMAR ARORA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

302 016 Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAYPA 5970 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri C.L. Yadav, CA shri Rajendra Sisodia,Adv Shri Vikas Yadav, Adv. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri Sanajy Dhariwal, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 13/09/2022 mn?kks"k.kk

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 gain Rs.1,14,75,791/-, Gross Total Income Rs.1,15,64,875/- Less: Deduction under Chapter VI-A Rs. 89,084/- Restricted to Income other than LTCG –Total Income Rs. 1,14,75,791/-, R/o Rs.1,14,75,790/- Assessed u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act at Rs.1,14,75,790/-. Issue demand notice and challan. Charged interest

KARUNA JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 2(1), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

302 003. PAN No. ADAPJ 9284G ..... Appellant Vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Jaipur …..Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Amit Kumar Jain, CA, Ld. AR Respondent by : Mr. Anup Singh, Addl. CIT, Ld. DR Date of hearing : 17/04/2025 Date of pronouncement : 30 /04/2025 O R D E R PER GAGAN GOYAL, A.M: This appeal by assessee is directed against the order

JAGDISH WADHWANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

Capital Gain Rs. 7,25,681/- -------------------- Though the assessee challenged the said action of the AO, however, even during the proceedings before the ld. CIT (A), the assessee did not file any documentary evidence and consequently the addition made by the AO was upheld by the ld. CIT (A). Even before us, the assessee has neither produced any supporting evidence

SUSHILA DEVI JANGID,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 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, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 374/JP/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2010-11 Smt. Sushila Devi Jangid 65, Koshaliya Vihar Hajyawala,Muhana Mandi Ke Pass, Sanganer, Jaipur 302 029 बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward 7(2) Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFMPJ 2091 P निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Utkarsh Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by :Shri Gautam Sing

302 029 Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No.: AFMPJ 2091 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Utkarsh Mishra, Advocate jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by :Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT -DR a lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 24/04/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 05 /05/2025 vkns'k@ORDER

SHRI AJAY AGARWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue

section 139(1) of the IT Act on 30.08.2015 declaring total income at Rs. 11,00,27,200/- which includes surrendered income of Rs. 10,69,91,302/- on account of Long Term Capital Gain