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

capital gain the same proportion as the cost of the new asset bears to the net consideration, shall not be charged under section 45: [Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall apply where— (a) The assessee,— (i) owns64 more than one residential house, other than the new asset, on the date of transfer of the original asset

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAVINDRA MITTAL, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 823/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2012-13 D.C.I.T., Cuke Shri Ravindra Mittal, Vs. Circle-6, 804, Akshat Niley Apartment, Jaipur. Hawa Sarak, Civil Lines, Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aexpm 9057 N Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

capital gain, therefore provisions of section 50C are applicable. The Assessing Officer has brought to tax, the area sold to other person (367.74 Sq. ft.) and area transferred to builder (4129.37 Sq. ft.) as income from business. Since, the assessee has acquired those constructed areas in exchange for land, it is held that land underneath this constructed area

SHRI GULAB CHAND MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 49/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2011-12 Cuke Shri Gulab Chand Meena, A.C.I.T.(Osd), Vs. Village- Dantali, Tehsil- Range-7, Sanganer, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Abupm 2026 R Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Manish Agarwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 11/01/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 28/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Cit(A)- 3, Jaipur Dated 06/12/2017 For The A.Y. 2011-12 In The Matter Of Order Passed U/S 143(3) Read With Section 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act), Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Disallowance Of Deduction U/S 54F Of Rs. 5,78,571/- Made By Ld.Ao Arbitrarily & Accordingly Treating It As A Long Term Capital Gain When All The Conditions Prescribed U/S 54F Were Fulfilled By Assessee. 1.1. That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Further Erred In Not Considering The Fact That Assessee Had Submitted The Valuation Report In Support Of His Claim Of 2

Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act), wherein following grounds have been taken. “1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of deduction u/s 54F of Rs. 5,78,571/- made by ld.AO arbitrarily and accordingly treating it as a long term capital gain

SHRI NARESH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

36,74,643/-. The expenditure in connection with transfer of property was Rs. 24,165/- and thus the long term capital gain from sale of property was Rs. 1,03,01,192/-. The amount of sale consideration so received was transferred to capital gain account and such amount was used for purchases of flat. The assessee claimed deduction

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

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

section 68 or not. In the case of NR Portfolio, it was held that the genuineness and credibility are deeper and obtrusive. Similarly, the bank statements provided by the assessee to prove the genuineness of the transactions cannot be considered in view of the judgment of Hon'ble court in the case of Pratham Telecom India Pvt Ltd, wherein

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

36(1)(iii) of the Act provides that the deduction for as regards the amount of interest paid in respect of capital borrowed for the purpose of business or profession shall be allowed, in computing the income referred to in section 28 of the Act. Section 28 pertains to computation of profits and gains

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

36(1)(iii) of the Act provides that the deduction for as regards the amount of interest paid in respect of capital borrowed for the purpose of business or profession shall be allowed, in computing the income referred to in section 28 of the Act. Section 28 pertains to computation of profits and gains

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

36(1)(iii) of the Act provides that the deduction for as regards the amount of interest paid in respect of capital borrowed for the purpose of business or profession shall be allowed, in computing the income referred to in section 28 of the Act. Section 28 pertains to computation of profits and gains

SHRI DHARMENDRA KUMAR PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain. Our view is supported by the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of Dr. D.L. Ramachandra Rao(supra) which has taken the view that if the lands are held by the assessee for a period more than the period prescribed under section 2(42A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, viz., 36

SHRI ARNAV GOYAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

capital gain declared by assessee is completely genuine: ARNAV GOYAL VS ITO, WARD 2(4), JAIPUR It is submitted that the transactions of purchase and sale of shares by the assessee are completely genuine and duly supported by respective evidences and thus, could not have been held as bogus in view of the following: 1. The assessee had purchased

RAJRAJESHWARI GUPTA ,KOTA vs. ITO , WARD 1(1),KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

36,700/- resulting into net capital gain of Rs. 48,995/-. The AO on perusal of record further observed that in the case of a family member of the same assessee, Shri D.C. Maini, in the same assessment year, similar exercise has been done, wherein a long-term capital loss of Rs. 11,59,066/- had been incurred on account

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

36,321/- declared by the appellant in this connection you are requested to furnish following evidences/copy of impugned seized documents or loose papers, if any (i) Copies of seized or impounded material (document or loose papers), if any, wherein cash payment, if any, made by the appellant for obtaining the long term capital gain is recorded or reflected (ii) Copy

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

36,321/- declared by the appellant in this connection you are requested to furnish following evidences/copy of impugned seized documents or loose papers, if any (i) Copies of seized or impounded material (document or loose papers), if any, wherein cash payment, if any, made by the appellant for obtaining the long term capital gain is recorded or reflected (ii) Copy

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

36,321/- declared by the appellant in this connection you are requested to furnish following evidences/copy of impugned seized documents or loose papers, if any (i) Copies of seized or impounded material (document or loose papers), if any, wherein cash payment, if any, made by the appellant for obtaining the long term capital gain is recorded or reflected (ii) Copy

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

36,321/- declared by the appellant in this connection you are requested to furnish following evidences/copy of impugned seized documents or loose papers, if any (i) Copies of seized or impounded material (document or loose papers), if any, wherein cash payment, if any, made by the appellant for obtaining the long term capital gain is recorded or reflected (ii) Copy

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SANGEETA MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

36,321/- declared by the appellant in this connection you are requested to furnish following evidences/copy of impugned seized documents or loose papers, if any (i) Copies of seized or impounded material (document or loose papers), if any, wherein cash payment, if any, made by the appellant for obtaining the long term capital gain is recorded or reflected (ii) Copy

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

36,321/- declared by the appellant in this connection you are requested to furnish following evidences/copy of impugned seized documents or loose papers, if any (i) Copies of seized or impounded material (document or loose papers), if any, wherein cash payment, if any, made by the appellant for obtaining the long term capital gain is recorded or reflected (ii) Copy

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

36,321/- declared by the appellant in this connection you are requested to furnish following evidences/copy of impugned seized documents or loose papers, if any (i) Copies of seized or impounded material (document or loose papers), if any, wherein cash payment, if any, made by the appellant for obtaining the long term capital gain is recorded or reflected (ii) Copy