MAHESH KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT ,CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

charitable trust, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed exemption u/s. 11. The Assessing Officer, on finding that the assessee was unable to satisfactorily explain the donations and the donors were fictitious persons, held that the assessee had tried to introduce unaccounted money in its books by way of donations and, therefore, the amount

LISAMMA SEBASTIAN,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Charitable Trust vs CCIT and Others 365 ITR 233(Ali) wherein the Hon'ble High Court held AO should have relevant and credible material with him to form requisite reason to believe that income of assessee has escaped assessment Maternal available on record has rational connection and relevant bearing on such formation of belief for issuing valid notices

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

69A—CIT(A) affirmed view taken by\nAssessing Officer except for granting partial relief such as with regard to claim for\ncarry forward of depreciation etc—Tribunal after taking note of factual position,\nmore particularly, that addition which was made in reassessment proceedings\nhaving been deleted by CIT(A) reassessment on heads which were not part of\nreasons recorded

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

69A—CIT(A) affirmed view taken by\nAssessing Officer except for granting partial relief such as with regard to claim for\ncarry forward of depreciation etc—Tribunal after taking note of factual position,\nmore particularly, that addition which was made in reassessment proceedings\nhaving been deleted by CIT(A) reassessment on heads which were not part of\nreasons recorded

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

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

Charitable Trust [1987] 31 Taxman 335 /167 ITR 129\n(Raj.) wherein it was held as under:\n“The error envisaged by section 263 was not one which depended on\npossibility or the guess work but it should be actually an error either of\nfact or law. Unless the Commissioner categorically says that there was\nsome income from speculative business

PRATIMA PANWAR,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O, WARD 3(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him.

Charitable Trust and MJRP University. In consideration she is drawing salary of Rs. 27500/- per month from Trust and Rs. 27,500/- from University during the financial year 2016-17. She has been filing her income tax return regularly for almost lat 15 years at PAN AKCPP2010P declaring her income of whatsoever nature, She hasfiled her ITR for the assessment

GAYATRI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Charitable Trust [1987] 31 Taxman 335 /167 ITR 129 (Raj )wherein it was held as under: 16 SMT. GAYATRI DEVI VS PR.CIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR “The error envisaged by section 263 was not one which depended on possibility or the guess work but it should be actually an error either of fact or law. Unless the Commissioner categorically says that there

V C GRANITES,AJMER vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

69A read with section 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961 and retaining the profit element only at Rs. 75,04,260/-. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing of all kinds of granite products. A search and seizure action under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was carried

DCIT, AJMER vs. M/S V.C. GRANITE, AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

69A read with section 115BBE of the IT Act, 1961 and retaining the profit element only at Rs. 75,04,260/-. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing of all kinds of granite products. A search and seizure action under section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 was carried

ASHOK NARIYANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

charitable trust, had disclosed donations received by it as its income, and claimed\nexemption u/s.11. The Assessing Officer, on finding that the assessee was unable to\nsatisfactorily explain the donations and the donors were fictitious persons, held that\nthe assessee had tried to introduce unaccounted money in its books by way of\ndonations and, therefore, the amount

ARUN PALAWAT,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL),, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

69A of the Act, but at the same time, did not levy higher tax as per provision of section 115BBE of the Act. Since a conjoint reading reveals that there was due application of mind by the AO during the assessment proceedings, the assessment cannot be held as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of revenue on account

ZARI SILK (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

69A of the Act, but at the same time, did not levy higher tax as per provision of section 115BBE of the Act. Since a conjoint reading reveals that there was due application of mind by the AO during the assessment proceedings, the assessment cannot be held as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of revenue on account

YUWAM EDUCATION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Charitable Trust [2022] 144 taxmann.com 54 (Madras)/[2023] 450 ITR 368 (Madras) [31-10-2022] x x x x Dr. S.C. Gupta vs. CIT [2001] 118 Taxman 252 (Allahabad) x x x x Bachittar Singh vs. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 400 (Punjab & Haryana] x x x x CIT v. Hotel Mariya [2010] 195 taxman 459 (Kerala

KAMAL SINGH,BHARATPUR vs. ITO WD 1, BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

69A of the Act is bad in law and thus liable to be deleted.’’ 2.1 At the outset of hearing of the appeal, the Bench noticed that there is delay of 430 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before the Bench for 3 SHRI KAMAL SINGH VS ITO, WARD -1, BHARATPUR which the assessee has filed an application

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Charitable Trust vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, Paper Book 1, Page No. 129 to 142) dated 14 October 2011, as reproduced from the court’s judgment transcript: “19. In the present case, nothing of this sort invokes the good conscience of this Court for exercising its wide discretionary powers under Articles

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Charitable Trust vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, Paper Book 1, Page No. 129 to 142) dated 14 October 2011, as reproduced from the court’s judgment transcript: “19. In the present case, nothing of this sort invokes the good conscience of this Court for exercising its wide discretionary powers under Articles

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Charitable Trust vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, Paper Book 1, Page No. 129 to 142) dated 14 October 2011, as reproduced from the court’s judgment transcript: “19. In the present case, nothing of this sort invokes the good conscience of this Court for exercising its wide discretionary powers under Articles

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

Charitable Trust vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & Ors. (Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur, Paper Book 1, Page No. 129 to 142) dated 14 October 2011, as reproduced from the court’s judgment transcript: “19. In the present case, nothing of this sort invokes the good conscience of this Court for exercising its wide discretionary powers under Articles