SHRI GOVIND SWAROOP GARG,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1-2, AJMER

In the result, ground is allowed for statistical purposes

deemed dividend u/s 2(22)(e) of the Act. In the result, the ground no. 3 of assessee’s appeal is dismissed. 13. In Ground No. 4, the assessee has challenged the addition of Rs. 7,57,000/- made by the AO on account of cash deposit in his bank account maintained with the Bank of Baroda, Ajmer. 14. Briefly

SMT. IRVIND KAUR GUJRAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

dividend income and royalty income is taxable in both the contracting states by specifically providing it in the article. However, in Article 6 it is provided that income from real property may be taxed in the contracting state in which that property is situated but it is not provided that 9 Smt. Irvind Kaur Gujral vs. ITO it may also

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

house property, profits and gains of business or profession, or capital gains, nor is it income from other sources' because the provisions of sections 69, 69A, 69B, and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure, as the case may be, have not been

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

deemed dividend, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable in law. He has submitted that assessee filed the original return of income on 29.12.2012. The time limit for service of notice u/s 143(2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

deemed dividend, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable in law. He has submitted that assessee filed the original return of income on 29.12.2012. The time limit for service of notice u/s 143(2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

deemed dividend, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable in law. He has submitted that assessee filed the original return of income on 29.12.2012. The time limit for service of notice u/s 143(2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA, KOTA

deemed dividend, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable in law. He has submitted that assessee filed the original return of income on 29.12.2012. The time limit for service of notice u/s 143(2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year

SMT. REEMA HARISH BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

deemed dividend, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable in law. He has submitted that assessee filed the original return of income on 29.12.2012. The time limit for service of notice u/s 143(2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2013. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year

VIJAY KUMAR VIJAYVERGIYA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPIUR

In the result ground no. 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

deemed dividend within the meaning as per section 2(22)(e) of the IT Act, 1961. The ld. AR of the assessee vide its letter dated 20.02.2015, submitted his point-wise reply stating that the assessee has received security deposit of 1,50,00,000/- in the regular course of business from the company under MOU development agreement for construction

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

deemed dividend, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable in law. He has submitted that assessee filed the original return of income on 20.12.2013. The time limit for service of notice u/s 143(2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2014. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year

SMT. JAYA PREM BHATIA,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

deemed dividend, the addition made by the AO is not sustainable in law. He has submitted that assessee filed the original return of income on 20.12.2013. The time limit for service of notice u/s 143(2) for the relevant AY was upto 30.09.2014. No notice was issued to the assessee before this date. Thus, the assessment proceedings for the year

KAILASH CHAND MEENA,ALWAR vs. ITO WARD2(3), ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

house property and hire charges received from JCB are indeed not based on facts. If this had been a real story he would have deposited installments of his JCB in an even manner and not in haphazard way. It so appears that this sum of Rs.10,60,000/- is someone else's money deposited by the assesse in his bank

BIMAL ROY SONI,J L N MARG vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, JAIPUR, STATUE CIRCLE

In the result, appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 239 & 240/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bimal Roy Soni 11, Chetak Marg, JLN Marg Jaipur cuke Vs. DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur NCR, Building LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFPPS 1588 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a lquokb

dividend income then the said disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable. Accordingly, we modify the orders of the authorities below on this issue and sustained the disallowance on account of interest expenditure U/s 14A of the Act. Bimal Roy Soni, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur 8. In the ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal

BIMAL ROY SONI,J L N MARG vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, N.C.R. BUILDING

In the result, appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 239 & 240/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bimal Roy Soni 11, Chetak Marg, JLN Marg Jaipur cuke Vs. DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur NCR, Building LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFPPS 1588 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a lquokb

dividend income then the said disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is not sustainable. Accordingly, we modify the orders of the authorities below on this issue and sustained the disallowance on account of interest expenditure U/s 14A of the Act. Bimal Roy Soni, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Jaipur 8. In the ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal

CAREER POINT LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

dividend and tax free interest, no part of expenditure appears to have been made towards the investment activity as emerging from the material. According to the respondent, the total investment from the huge surplus is comparatively small and investment made was effortless, without any burden of administrative expenses. In view of fact that no expenditure was incurred for earning exempted

DCIT, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. SMT. VEENA GOAYAL, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue is dismissed

dividend. 8. Provisions of Section 2(22)(e) of the Act comes to play only if the company makes any payment to such shareholder, by way of advance or loan and that too to the extent the company possesses accumulated profit, provided that his/her holding is not less than ten percent of voting power. From provisions of section

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S N. M. AGROFOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Housing Development Co. Vs DCIT [2014] 49 taxmann.com 98 (Karnataka) is as under: "Section 153A, read with section 263, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment in case of search or requisition (Conditions precedent) - Assessment year 2008-09 Whether once proceedings under section 153A is initiated, pursuant to search, order of assessment in respect of six years

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

deemed to have been applied, to charitable or religious purposes in India during the previous year but is accumulated or set apart, either in whole or in part, for application to such purposes in India, such income so accumulated or set apart shall not be included in the total income of the previous year of the person in receipt

GOLCHA MINERALS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following Grounds Of Appeal:

deemed necessary or convenient for any business which the Company is authorized to carry on. 7. to lease, let out on hire, mortgage, pledge, sell or otherwise dispose of the whole or any part of the undertaking of the company or any lands, business, property, rights or assets of any kind of the company or any share or interest therein