RAM DHAN YADAV,CHOMU JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO 7(3), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Natural Justice. " 3. The learned CIT (Appeal) erred in law and on facts in adjudicating the appeal filed against order dated 6th March, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(3), Jaipur u/s 144 r.w.t. 147 of Income Tax Act by way of justifying and retaining the Additions made to the tune

RAM DHAN YADAV,CHOMU JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 7(3), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Natural Justice. " 3. The learned CIT (Appeal) erred in law and on facts in adjudicating the appeal filed against order dated 6th March, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(3), Jaipur u/s 144 r.w.t. 147 of Income Tax Act by way of justifying and retaining the Additions made to the tune

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

House (ITA No.613/2010). In the facts of above case, a cash of Rs. 24,58,400/- was deposited in bank account by the assessee. The Assessing Officer made the addition on the ground that nexus of such deposit was not establish with any source of income. The assessee claimed that it was duly recorded in the books of account

SHRI MANOHAR LAL CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

natural justice to create unfair demand. In view of the above you are requested to kindly accept the cost of construction of 910 Sq Ft as claimed by the assessee.” 7. Per contra, the ld. DR submitted that property sold by the assessee was not a property which was used for residential purposes as it apparent from the description

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

house property.\nWhile responding (vide letter dated 18.03.2018 PB 3), to the surprise of the\nassessee, it came to his notice that some mistakes have been committed\ninadvertently in as much as deductions even though not applicable, could be\nclaimed therein. Therefore, the assessee in all truthfulness and simplicity,\nstraightforwardly and voluntarily admitted that some deductions could be wrongly\nclaimed

AJOY SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

house property.\nWhile responding (vide letter dated 18.03.2018 PB 3), to the surprise of the\nassessee, it came to his notice that some mistakes have been committed\ninadvertently in as much as deductions even though not applicable, could be\nclaimed therein. Therefore, the assessee in all truthfulness and simplicity,\nstraightforwardly and voluntarily admitted that some deductions could be wrongly\nclaimed

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

house property.\nWhile responding (vide letter dated 18.03.2018 PB 3), to the surprise of the\nassessee, it came to his notice that some mistakes have been committed\ninadvertently in as much as deductions even though not applicable, could be\nclaimed therein. Therefore, the assessee in all truthfulness and simplicity,\nstraightforwardly and voluntarily admitted that some deductions could be wrongly\nclaimed

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

house property.\nWhile responding (vide letter dated 18.03.2018 PB 3), to the surprise of the\nassessee, it came to his notice that some mistakes have been committed\ninadvertently in as much as deductions even though not applicable, could be\nclaimed therein. Therefore, the assessee in all truthfulness and simplicity,\nstraightforwardly and voluntarily admitted that some deductions could be wrongly\nclaimed

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

house property.\nWhile responding (vide letter dated 18.03.2018 PB 3), to the surprise of the\nassessee, it came to his notice that some mistakes have been committed\ninadvertently in as much as deductions even though not applicable, could be\nclaimed therein. Therefore, the assessee in all truthfulness and simplicity,\nstraightforwardly and voluntarily admitted that some deductions could be wrongly\nclaimed

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

natural justice.\n2.(A) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT (A) has erred in\nconfirming the action of the ld. AO in taxing a sum of Rs. 55,16,681 as long term capital\ngain in the hands of the assessee. The action of the CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary\nand

SUNIL CHABLANI,AJMER, RAJASTHAN vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

house\nproperty for Rs 69.90 Lacs vide a registered sale deed executed on 28.07.2017 (and i.e.\nthe very information also in possession of the AO). Thus, the money of Rs 69.90 Lacs\nwas not source less and the AO himself was of the view that this was a transaction of\nsale of immovable property hence there is no question

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

natural justice.\n\n2.(A) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT (A) has erred in\nconfirming the action of the ld. AO in taxing a sum of Rs. 55,16,681 as long term capital\ngain in the hands of the assessee. The action of the CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

natural justice.\n2.(A) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT (A) has erred in\nconfirming the action of the ld. AO in taxing a sum of Rs. 55,16,681 as long term capital\ngain in the hands of the assessee. The action of the CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary\nand

RAGHAV KUMAR DHOOT,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

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

house property and income\nfrom other sources.\n3.1 In the case of M/s Dhoot Sangmermer Pvt. Ltd, a survey\nunder section 133A of the Act was carried out on 05/06/2018 and\nduring the course of survey, certain papers were found at the\nbusiness premises of the company which was inventorised by the\nsurvey party as Annexure A-(Exhibit No.02). Shri

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

natural justice.\n2.(A) In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT (A) has erred in\nconfirming the action of the ld. AO in taxing a sum of Rs. 55,16,681 as long term capital\ngain in the hands of the assessee. The action of the CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary\nand

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

justice and against the\nlaw. This sec. 115BBE is charging of tax on a higher rate and it cannot be applied\ndirectly without giving any show cause notice when the issue are disputed that whether\nthe higher rate of tax applicable or not on the alleged income or the nature of income\nfalls u/s 68/69 and 115BBE. Hence

PRADEEP KUMAR DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that\nrevenue stands dismissed

natural justice.\n4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the learned AO in\nconsidering the sale deeds found during search belonging to firm M/s\nEminent Build Developers in the hands of the assessee. Action in the\nhands of the assessee deserves

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR DUSAD, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that\nrevenue stands dismissed

natural justice.\n4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the learned AO in\nconsidering the sale deeds found during search belonging to firm M/s\nEminent Build Developers in the hands of the assessee. Action in the\nhands of the assessee deserves