DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S. MULTI METAL PRIVATE LTD., KOTA

seizure operation was carried out on 7th October, 2009 and an assessment came to be framed under Section 143(3) read with Section 153A(1)(b) in determining the total income of the Assessee of Rs. 14.5 crores against declared income of Rs. 3.44 crores. The ITAT deleted the additions on the ground that it was not based

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

search and seizure action that disallowable expenses had been claimed as allowable expenses by the appellant and no separate disclosure

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

seizure- Assessment in case of (Conditions precedent) Assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 Pursuant to High Court's order company CML was amalgamated with assessee- company from 1-4-2003-In returns of income, assessee set off losses of company CMI. against its income-Thereafter a search took place in assessee's premises and certain incriminating material was seized

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

seizure- Assessment in case of (Conditions precedent) Assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 Pursuant to High Court's order company CML was amalgamated with assessee- company from 1-4-2003-In returns of income, assessee set off losses of company CMI. against its income-Thereafter a search took place in assessee's premises and certain incriminating material was seized

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

seizure- Assessment in case of (Conditions precedent) Assessment years 2004-05 and 2005-06 Pursuant to High Court's order company CML was amalgamated with assessee- company from 1-4-2003-In returns of income, assessee set off losses of company CMI. against its income-Thereafter a search took place in assessee's premises and certain incriminating material was seized

RUPESH TAMBI,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

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

seizure action to buy peace of mind is a mere self-serving\nstatement. The surrender of income was with respect to specific undisclosed\nassets and Investments which were found during the course of search and\nseizure action.\nThe amount of total acceptance of undisclosed income (normally referred as\nsurrender) is not small and is substantial running. It is beyond human

PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result assessee’s appeal being ITA No

disallowance of expenses found recoded in the seized material. This ground is common for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. During the course of search and seizure

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. PRAKAS CHAND SHARMA, JAIPUR

In the result assessee’s appeal being ITA No

disallowance of expenses found recoded in the seized material. This ground is common for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. During the course of search and seizure

PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result assessee’s appeal being ITA No

disallowance of expenses found recoded in the seized material. This ground is common for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. During the course of search and seizure

PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result assessee’s appeal being ITA No

disallowance of expenses found recoded in the seized material. This ground is common for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. During the course of search and seizure

PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result assessee’s appeal being ITA No

disallowance of expenses found recoded in the seized material. This ground is common for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. During the course of search and seizure