MACRO TOWNSHIP PVT LTD,288-289 MAHAVEER NAGAR DURGAPURA JAIPUR vs. DCIT CC -2 JAIPUR, LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 153C, as settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court: Satisfaction of the Assessing Officer should be based on cogent material and should not be arrived at in a casual manner. It is submitted that Section 132(4A) (i) clearly stipulates that when inter alia any document is found in the possession or control of any person in the course

MACRO PROPRIETIES PRIVATE LIMITED,M 28 INCOME TAX COLONY TONK ROAD JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No.174 TO 177/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2013-14 TO 2016-17 M/s. Macro Properties Pvt. Ltd.M-28, Income Tax Colony, Tonk Road Jaipur cuke Vs. The DCIT Central Circle-2 LIC Building, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCM 3633 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri C.M. Agarwal, CA jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri JameshKurian, CI

gain earned on sale of aforementioned land. Based on whatever material is available on file and in absence of any new submission/ finding and any other material for which the appellant was provided so many opportunities, I do not find any infirmity in the addition made by the AO. This Ground of Appeal is rejected and the addition

SH. POORAN MAL KANWAT ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

18. As a result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the impugned orders passed by Learned CIT(A), and impugned assessments framed by Assessing Officer, are set aside

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

capital gain earned on sale of land situated at Ajayrajpura & Mathurawala, Tehsil- Sanganer, Jaipur amounting to Rs.12,40,54,144/- 8.1 …… 8.2 I have considered the observations / findings of the AO in the assessment order for the year under consideration. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant has not furnished any information/ evidences to rebut the findings

OM PRAKASH RASORIA,ALWAR vs. ITO, ALWAR

Capital Gains-Exemption-Sale of agricultural land and purchase of agricultural land-condition precedent for exemption-New asset purchased must be in the name of assessee himself- Assessee purchasing land in name of son or grandson-Not entitled to exemption under section 54B-Incom-tax Act, 1961. 5.8 Accordingly, I hold that the purchase of land amounting

SUNSTONE ENGINEERING,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

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

4,559/- on STT on shares totaling to Rs. 8,34,916/-. This short term loss on shares had been shown as expenses in profit and loss account while the AO opined 7 M/s. Sunstone Engineering Industries (P) Ltd.,Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward- (T&J), Jaipur that the company is engaged in the business of manufacture of emery flour mills

ITO, KOTA vs. CHANDI RAM, KOTA

In the result, the ground no

capital gain. Before the Hon’ble Supreme Court the issue raised was whether compensation payable to the assessee accrue or arise during the assessment year 1956-57. The Hon’ble Supreme Court was pleased to hold that in the present case, although the award was made by the arbitrator on 29.07.1955, enhancing the amount compensation payable to the assessee

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI SANDEEP CHHABRA, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Section 153B(1)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act). The grounds taken by the Revenue reads as under: “1 Whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition of Rs. 68,40,468/- made on the basis of figures as per documents seized from

HARBANS LAL SETHI,JAIPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

gains of business shall be computed in accordance with the provisions contained in ss. 30 to 43D. Sec. 40 provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under other sections. The computation under s. 29 is to be made under s. 145 on the basis of the books regularly maintained by the assessee