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)

gain……’’ Page 53: Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it is held that the assessee has paid commission @ 2% of sale value of shares of M/s. Kapac Pharma Limited and paid a sum of Rs.63,402/- (2% of 31,70,080/- sale value) and the assessee has not offered any explanation about the source of the same

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

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

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

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

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

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

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

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

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

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

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

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

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

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. ASHA JAIN, JAIPUR

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

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

Capital gains cannot be treated as bogus solely on the basis that the price of the shares has risen manifold and the reason for astronomical rise is not related to any fundamentals of market. If the transactions are duly proved by trading from stock exchange and the documentation is proper, the gains cannot be assessed as unexplained credit

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

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

money routed back to you in the garb of Long Term Capital Gains. It is therefore proposed to treat the said amount of Rs.23,23,696/- as unexplained

SHRI ASHNUTH GOYAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, WARD -1(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him. Thus, The Addition Of Rs. 30,04,864/- So Uphold Deserves To Be Deleted. Shri Ashnuth Goyal Vs Acit, Ward 1(3), Jaipur

unexplained credit, after placing reliance on some information and statements of third parties recorded by some other officials, in some other case and behind the back of assessee that too without having any) specific mention therein of either the name of assessee or his broker and moreover without allowing the cross-examination those persons to the assessee, is totally against

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

money by way of bogus Long Term Capital Gain. The Tribunal has also followed the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in case of CIT vs. Smt. Pooja Agarwal (supra) wherein the Hon’ble High Court has also upheld the finding of the ld. CIT (A) and this Tribunal when the assessee produced all the relevant details and evidence

LAL CHAND MEENA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7-3, JAIPUR

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

capital gains in the hands of the assessee is hereby deleted. In the result, ground no. 1 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed. ITA No. 515/JP/15 Lalchand Meena, vs. ITO, Ward 7(3), Jaipur 27. In respect of ground No. 2, brief facts of the case are that the AO observed that assessee has deposited Rs.1

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

unexplained expenditure) of the Income Tax Act since the expense was neither incurred nor claimed by the assessee. ITAT rulings in Parasmal Bhandari, Reena Kumari, Soumitra Choudhury, Kanwarlal Agarwal, and Shri Amandeep Singh Bhatia stress that such additions require direct, credible evidence linking the assessee to the payments. Given the transparency of the assessee's transactions through recognized channels

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

unexplained Interest Income Rs. 2,924.00 Also, deduction claimed by assessee u/s VIA to the tune of Rs.1,00,000/- was not given. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the A.O. against which the assessee is in further appeal before the ITAT. 3. The ground No. 1 and 1.1 of the appeal raised

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

money brought on record by paying no taxes in the garb of exempted income. It is further detected that M/s Midland Polymers ltd. (Scrip Code-531597) and M/s Sulabh Engineering (script Code- 508969) are a penny stock listed company. It has very small capital base but its market capitalization is multifold to its capital base. Further, information in respect

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

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed

money brought on record by paying no taxes in the garb of exempted income. It is further detected that M/s Midland Polymers ltd. (Scrip Code-531597) and M/s Sulabh Engineering (script Code- 508969) are a penny stock listed company. It has very small capital base but its market capitalization is multifold to its capital base. Further, information in respect