NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

133A of the I.T. Act, 1961 conducted in the case of M/s Midland Polymers Ltd. (PAN AABCM8686L) Indore on 23.08.2017 the notice was issued to the assessee as per provision of section 148 of the Act. During survey proceedings loose papers, Books, CD etc were found and impounded. On analysis of the information gathered during the survey proceedings

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)

survey action u/s 133A of the Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department in the "Oswal Group" of Jaipur on 06.09.2018. During the Search, residential premises of Shri Surya Singhal 278, Dada Badi Extn, Kota was also covered u/s 132 of the Act on 06.09.2018. In that action certain incriminating documents were found & seized from the premises

M/S WHOLESALE CLOTH MERCHANT,KOTA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), RAJASTHAN, 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. 688/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant Cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. Pan No.: Aaatw 0127 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) & 12Aa(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That In The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Pr. Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Has Grossly Erred In Cancelling The Registration Of The Assessee Appellant Trust Under Section 12A Of The Act By Invoking Section 12Aa(4) Of The Act W.E.F. 01/04/2013. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Amend Any Ground On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

survey u/s 133A of the Act in the case of assessee. The assessment has been completed u/s 148/143(3) of the act vide order dated 19.12.2018. As the assessment 30 ITA 688/JP/2019_ M/s Wholesale Cloth Merchant Association Vs Pr.CIT has been completed, the purpose of transfer u/s 127A has also been completed. Although No notices regarding the transfer

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

133A was carried out on 09.12.2014 i.e.before the close of the relevant previous year, during which, the assessee admitted income of Rs. 3.94 ITA No. 267, 196 & 197/JPR/2024 17 Shri Nath Corporation & Ors., Jaipur. cr./- and including the same, ROA was filed u/s 139(1) on 15.09.2015 at total income of Rs. 3,95,19,200/-which was a voluntary

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S CHOKHI DHANI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital gain is chargeable on its compulsory acquisition. 2. The appellant Pvt. Ltd. company before submitting the ground- wise submissions, the appellant submits the following undisputed facts of the case:– (i) That during the course of search and seizure action carried under section 132 of the IT Act by the Department no incriminating document was found and/or seized

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S VISION ESTATES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital gain is chargeable on its compulsory acquisition. 2. The appellant Pvt. Ltd. company before submitting the ground- wise submissions, the appellant submits the following undisputed facts of the case:– (i) That during the course of search and seizure action carried under section 132 of the IT Act by the Department no incriminating document was found and/or seized

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S RIGID CONDUCTORS (RAJ.) PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital gain is chargeable on its compulsory acquisition. 2. The appellant Pvt. Ltd. company before submitting the ground- wise submissions, the appellant submits the following undisputed facts of the case:– (i) That during the course of search and seizure action carried under section 132 of the IT Act by the Department no incriminating document was found and/or seized

DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX, LIC BUILDING vs. M/S GEE VEE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital gain is chargeable on its compulsory acquisition. 2. The appellant Pvt. Ltd. company before submitting the ground- wise submissions, the appellant submits the following undisputed facts of the case:– (i) That during the course of search and seizure action carried under section 132 of the IT Act by the Department no incriminating document was found and/or seized

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA , JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

133A was carried out on 09.12.2014 i.e.before the close of the relevant previous year, during which, the assessee admitted income of Rs.3.94\ncr./- and including the same, ROA was filed u/s 139(1) on 15.09.2015 at total income of Rs.3,95,19,200/-which was a voluntary declaration.\n3.2 The very fact of the assessee declaring additional income during

JAGDISH KUMAR ARORA,BHAWANIMANDI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

survey action u/s 133A was carried out at the business premises of the assessee on dated 04.07.2016 where a diary was found in particulars of unaccounted debtors to the tune of Rs.2,05,00,000/- which was not recorded in the books of accounts. The statement of assessee was also recorded u/s 133A. On being asked at question

TURAB ALI BOHRA,BHILWARA,BHILWARA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE,AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

Survey u/s 133A has no evidentiary value and any\nadmission made during such statement cannot be made basis of addition. Reliance\nplaced CIT v. Khader Khan Son (2008) 300 ITR 157 (Mad.) (HC). Affirmed by Apex\nCourt in, CIT v. S. Khader Khan Son (2012) 210 Taxman 248(2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC) /\n(2012) 25 taxmann.com 413 (SC).\nHence

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)

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

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)

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

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)

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

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

u/s. 263 by the Id. PCIT is bad in law and\ndeserves to be quashed and set-aside.\nGround No. 5:\nDeduction under section 10AA of the Act:\n6. That as submitted hereinabove subsequent to survey conducted on 17-\n18.08.2017, reassessment proceedings u/s. 148 of the Act were initiated and\n37\nITA No. 598/JP/2024\nPinkcity Jewelhouse Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT

DEEPAK KUMAR AGARWAL, HUF,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR

survey operations carried out by the Investigation Wing of the Department, Kolkata, Shri Sunil Dokania admitted that he is aware of suspicious transactions done by some companies in the script of M/s. Kailash Auto Finance Ltd. through the broker houses. It was submitted that the assessee has shown huge capital gains earned from purchase and sale of the shares

PRANATI BUILDCON, KOTA,KOTA vs. ACIT/DCIT CEN CIR ,KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

capital gain, business or profession or income from other sources then it is to be assessed as deemed income u/s 68 or 69 family. In the present case, the addition made by the AO is u/s 69C of the Act. The section 69C is reproduced as under- Unexplained expenditure, etc. 69C. Where in any financial year an assessee has incurred

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried out on 17.01.2019 at the business premises of M/s Kath Prothers, Toonga, Bassi, Jaipur. During the survey 5 Kath Brothers vs. ACIT proceedings, physical verification was made for the stock of his business and noted that total stock valued at Rs.2,69,28,041/- was found as against total stock recorded