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 :

VII. Conclusion • The assessee’s silence to the Section 127 notice issued by the Central wing, Jaipur is deemed acceptance (J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust). • The transfer is a lawful administrative act within the Commissioner’s discretion (Pannalal Binjraj; Kashiram Aggarwalla). • Procedural safeguards were satisfied: notice, opportunity, and communication of reasons (Ajantha Industries; Genus Electrotech). • Under the faceless regime, territorial inconvenience

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 :

VII. Conclusion • The assessee’s silence to the Section 127 notice issued by the Central wing, Jaipur is deemed acceptance (J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust). • The transfer is a lawful administrative act within the Commissioner’s discretion (Pannalal Binjraj; Kashiram Aggarwalla). • Procedural safeguards were satisfied: notice, opportunity, and communication of reasons (Ajantha Industries; Genus Electrotech). • Under the faceless regime, territorial inconvenience

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 :

VII. Conclusion • The assessee’s silence to the Section 127 notice issued by the Central wing, Jaipur is deemed acceptance (J.R. Tantia Charitable Trust). • The transfer is a lawful administrative act within the Commissioner’s discretion (Pannalal Binjraj; Kashiram Aggarwalla). • Procedural safeguards were satisfied: notice, opportunity, and communication of reasons (Ajantha Industries; Genus Electrotech). • Under the faceless regime, territorial inconvenience

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

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

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

condoning the delay, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the matter in ITA No. 1007/JP/2025 for A.Y 2017-18 may be taken as the lead case for discussions, and on this aspect of the matter ld. DR has not raised any West Central Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd. vs. ITO objection. Accepting this consensus, we proceed

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

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

delay in filling these three appeals by the assessee.\n6.\nBefore we take up these appeals on its merits, after condoning the\ndelay, the Id. AR of the assessee submitted that the matter in ITA No.\n1007/JP/2025 for A.Y 2017-18 may be taken as the lead case for\ndiscussions, and on this aspect of the matter

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

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

delay in filling these three appeals by the assessee.\n6.\nBefore we take up these appeals on its merits, after condoning the\ndelay, the Id. AR of the assessee submitted that the matter in ITA No.\n1007/JP/2025 for A.Y 2017-18 may be taken as the lead case for\ndiscussions, and on this aspect of the matter

JAIPRAKASH YADAV,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD, BEHROR, BEHROR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made by the assessing officer of Rs. 7,00,000/- unexplained money u/s 69A r. w.s 115BBE of the Act. 8. On the facts and circumstances of the case

MOTI RAM BAIRWA,BASSI, JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

Section 56(2)(vii) when properties are encumbered or disputed b) the property was situated at a lower height and lacked proper water supply, further reducing its effective market value. The payment made was in line with the prevailing market rate. 6. The AO erred in law and on facts by adding Rs. 14,41,000 as unexplained expenses despite

JAIPUR RUGS COMPANY PVT LTD.,MANSAROVAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Return Of Income For The Assessment Year.

56 days between filling of tax audit report and filling of ITR Form No.6 (04.10.2017 to 29.11.2017) ignoring the applicable provision u/s 43B. 4. That the Appellant assessee craves for a leave to add, alter and amend any Grounds of appeal at the time of appellate hearing.” 3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that

ARUN BHARDWAJ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1 , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

condone the delay of 21 days in filing the appeal before us. 4 Arun Bhardwaj, Delhi. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an Individual and was residing in Delhi. During the year under consideration the assessee had income from professional receipt from the company named Synergy Property Development Services Pvt. Ltd., Delhi. The assessee

KULDEEP SINGH SHEKHAWAT,KOTA vs. ITO W-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Gagan Goyalkuldeep Singh Shekhawat, 11, Samridhi Traders, Police Line, Gopal Vihar, Baran Road-324001 Pan No. Araps0973M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Kota …... Respondent

56,070/- (i.e. Rs. 32,76,000/ cost of new house and Rs. 1,63,830/- being registry charges). The disallowance so made and confirmed by the Id. CIT (A), being contrary to the provisions of law and the established facts, kindly be deleted in full. 4. Registry charges not included

RAM DEV CHANDELWAL,S/O SHRI HEERA LAL CHANDELWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - BUNDI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 4. The fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee has e-filed his return of income on 09.03.2018 vide ack No. 433729340090318 showing total income of Rs. 6,58,230/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case

RANJAN SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 6(2), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 143(3)/147 and 144/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thus raising following grounds of appeals in the above mentioned appeals; SHRI RANJAN SHARMA VS ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR ITA NO.238/JPR/2025 – A.Y. 2010-11 ‘’1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and facts

RANJAN SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

Section 143(3)/147 and 144/143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thus raising following grounds of appeals in the above mentioned appeals; SHRI RANJAN SHARMA VS ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR ITA NO.238/JPR/2025 – A.Y. 2010-11 ‘’1. That under the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC has erred in law and facts

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS LLP, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

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

vii) It is submitted that the uncorroborated notings in the Excel sheets should not be acted upon to derive any inference against the assessee. (viii) The notings in the Excel sheets lacked corroboration of the notings although it appears that the department is attempting in this direction. (ix) The said computer pendrives were never shown to the assessee

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

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

vii) It is submitted that the uncorroborated notings in the Excel sheets should not be acted upon to derive any inference against the assessee. (viii) The notings in the Excel sheets lacked corroboration of the notings although it appears that the department is attempting in this direction. (ix) The said computer pendrives were never shown to the assessee

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

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

vii) It is submitted that the uncorroborated notings in the Excel sheets should not be acted upon to derive any inference against the assessee. (viii) The notings in the Excel sheets lacked corroboration of the notings although it appears that the department is attempting in this direction. (ix) The said computer pendrives were never shown to the assessee

KIRAN FINE JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, JAIPUR

In the result ground no 2 raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

condone the delay as observed by the registry. 5. Now coming to the merits of the appeal. The brief facts of the case are that a survey u/s 133A of the IT. Act, 1961 at the business premises of the assessee company was carried out on 02.08.2017 which was subsequently converted into search and seizure action operation as per provision