DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PVT LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the years [A

disallowance so\nconfirmed by ld. CIT(A) in both the assessment years deserves to be deleted.\"\n\n29.\nWe have heard the rival contentions and perused the material\nplaced on record. At the outset we noticed that it is a case of employee's\ncontribution of PF which has been deducted from the salary and not\ndeposited within

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)

5A are also an exception to the rule that when an income which is ultimately brought to tax is declared in a return of income, there can be no question of treating the Assessee as having "concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income". Those Explanations will also not apply in the present case because those Explanations

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

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

5A are also an exception to the rule that when an income which is ultimately brought to tax is declared in a return of income, there can be no question of treating the Assessee as having \"concealed particulars of income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income\". Those Explanations will also not apply in the present case because those Explanations

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

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

5A are also an exception to the rule that when an income which is\nultimately brought to tax is declared in a return of income, there can be no\nquestion of treating the Assessee as having \"concealed particulars of income or\nfurnished inaccurate particulars of income\". Those Explanations will also not\napply in the present case because those Explanations

DATA INGENIOUS GLOBAL LIMITED,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to costs

5A deserves to be\nwithdrawn and accordingly the levy of penalty upon Rupees 2712184.00\ndeserves to be quashed.\n5. That the ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-IV, Jaipur has\nerred in law as well as on the facts and circumstances of the case in upholding\nthe penalty u/s_271(1) © of the Income Tax Act, 1961 with reference to\nvariation

BITTHAL DAS PARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 , JAIPUR

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

Bench: Him. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

disallowance of carried forward does not mean providing inaccurate particular of income or concealed the particulars of income. Based on that factual matter and relying on the explanation 5A to section

TIJARIA POLYPIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRLCE 4, JAIPUR

disallowance of Rs.5,12,198/- was\nmade u/s 14A of I.T. Act, 1961. Subsequently considering information received by\nId. AO from ITO (Inv.), Unit-1 and AIU, Kolkata, the assessment was reopened by\nissue of notice u/s 148 dated 18.03.2019, in response to which the assessee filed\nreturn of income and requested for supply of reasons recorded, which were\nprovided

J C ANTIQUES AND CRAFTS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance made in the quantum proceedings actually represents the concealment on the part of the assessee as envisaged in section 271 (1)(c) of the Act, and whether it is a fit case to impose the penalty by invoking the said provisions. Hon’ble Apex court in the case of Eilly Lilly & Company reported in 312 ITR 225 has held

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)

5A of the Land Acquisition Act to the state Government on 26.11.2007. Subsequently notification under section 6 of Land Acquisition Act was published on 23.01.2008 and on 21.06.2008 to 26.06.2008. Notice u/s 9(1) was published. • Thereafter the State Government vide letter dated 24.06.2010 decided the award ex-parte of the lands which were acquired for Special Economic Zone

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)

5A of the Land Acquisition Act to the state Government on 26.11.2007. Subsequently notification under section 6 of Land Acquisition Act was published on 23.01.2008 and on 21.06.2008 to 26.06.2008. Notice u/s 9(1) was published. • Thereafter the State Government vide letter dated 24.06.2010 decided the award ex-parte of the lands which were acquired for Special Economic Zone

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)

5A of the Land Acquisition Act to the state Government on 26.11.2007. Subsequently notification under section 6 of Land Acquisition Act was published on 23.01.2008 and on 21.06.2008 to 26.06.2008. Notice u/s 9(1) was published. • Thereafter the State Government vide letter dated 24.06.2010 decided the award ex-parte of the lands which were acquired for Special Economic Zone

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)

5A of the Land Acquisition Act to the state Government on 26.11.2007. Subsequently notification under section 6 of Land Acquisition Act was published on 23.01.2008 and on 21.06.2008 to 26.06.2008. Notice u/s 9(1) was published. • Thereafter the State Government vide letter dated 24.06.2010 decided the award ex-parte of the lands which were acquired for Special Economic Zone

M/S BANSAL OIL MILL LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section provides that if any sum is found credited in the books of accounts, then the assessee has to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the party from whom amount is received and the genuineness of the transaction. In the present case, the assessee has not only proved the identity of the party from whom the loan has been taken

RAM SHARAN KATTA, 257, KATTA STREET, JAIN MANDIR WALI GALI, DURGAPURA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(4), JAIPUR, WARD-6(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance of business. loss of Rs. 4,29,946/-\nincurred on account of trading in real estate. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal,\nunjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by\naccepting the loss of Rs. 4,29,946/-.\n3. In the facts and circumstances of the case

RAM SHRAN KATTA, 257, KATTA STREET, JAIN MANDIR WALI GALI, DURGAPURA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance of business. loss of Rs. 4,29,946/-\nincurred on account of trading in real estate. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal,\nunjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by\naccepting the loss of Rs. 4,29,946/-.\n3. In the facts and circumstances of the case

ARVIND KUMAR NEHRA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Section 148A(d) of the Act.\nIt is ordered accordingly.\"\nHere also the same position and liable to be quashed the assessment order. Further the\ncase of the assessee is on much strong footing because in the notice the time is given only\n3.00 hour as the notice digitally signed at 11.06 AM on dt. 17.12.2019 and the time