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

house property and after claiming\ndeduction under u/s80C at Rs. 1,00,000/-.\n5.2 During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment\nyear 2012-13 had been completed under section 143

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

house property and after claiming\ndeduction under u/s80C at Rs. 1,00,000/-.\n5.2 During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment\nyear 2012-13 had been completed under section 143

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

house property and after claiming\ndeduction under u/s80C at Rs. 1,00,000/-.\n5.2 During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment\nyear 2012-13 had been completed under section 143

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

house property and after claiming\ndeduction under u/s80C at Rs. 1,00,000/-.\n5.2 During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment\nyear 2012-13 had been completed under section 143

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

house property and after claiming\ndeduction under u/s80C at Rs. 1,00,000/-.\n5.2 During the course of assessment proceedings for the assessment\nyear 2012-13 had been completed under section 143

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)

house property and, therefore, there cannot be any presumption of lack of enquiry more particularly when the detailed questionnaire was issued by the AO during the assessment proceedings and in this regard the assessee had also furnished all the details alongwith decision of Chennai Properties & Investments Ltd. vs CIT (supra). Therefore, it cannot be presumed that there was lack

SMT RAMA BAJAJ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 24(b) as explained above. 2.7.3 The observation of the ld. AO that regular EMI of Rs. 49,743/- is being paid from the month of April, 2008 onwards can have no adverse bearing on the claim of the assessee. 2.7.4 The ld. AO’s allegation that appellant has shown rental income of Rs. 36,000/- for the whole

PRAMOD KUMAR CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

House Hajyawala,\nSanganer, Jaipur\nVs.\nITO,\nWard 7(2),\nJaipur\nस्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: BACPC4828D\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Shri Vinod Kumar Gupta, CA\nराजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing\n: 25/06/2025\nउदघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 09/07/2025\nआदेश

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

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

House Property' and ignoring the uncontroverted affidavit of the staff of the assessee proving that the basement and 2 Sh. Manohar Lal Chaudhary, Jaipur Vs. Dy. CIT, Circle-06, Jaipur the room (kotari) were being used for the residence of the staff for last so many years. 1.2. Alternatively, because the Revenue authorities have grossly erred in not allowing

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

INDIRA GIRI,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX DEPARMENT JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Furnishing Itr, Therefore Deposit In Capital Gain Account For Compliance U/S 54(2) Was Impossible On The Part Of The Assessee.

143(1). During the year under consideration, the appellant has sold two immovable property for a total sale consideration of Rs.1,49,00,000. In the computation of capital gain, appellant has claimed deduction u/s 54F for an amount of Rs. 1,03,06,141/-. The appellant submitted copy of agreement to sell of residential property purchased

SAROJ DEVI HALDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

house property, income from capital Gain and\nincome from other sources. A copy of the return of income filed by the\nassessee is available on paper book page No...1.\nSubsequently enquiries were conducted in the case of assessee by DDIT\n(Inv) wing-2 Jaipur. In the matter detailed statements of husband of the\nassessee Shri Mahendra Kumar Haldiya

SMT. SAROJ SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

143(3) on dated 29.12.2017. Assessee has declared income Rs. 46,08,856/- while Ld. AO has assessed income of Rs. 3,19,46,8961-. The Ld. AO has made the addition as under: Income declared by assessee: 4608856.00 Add: Addition due to disallowing standard deduction u/s 24: 3335135.00 Add: Addition in trading results: 24002905.00 …………………… Total assessed income

DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SAROJ SHARMA, JAIPUR

143(3) on dated 29.12.2017. Assessee has declared income Rs. 46,08,856/- while Ld. AO has assessed income of Rs. 3,19,46,8961-. The Ld. AO has made the addition as under: Income declared by assessee: 4608856.00 Add: Addition due to disallowing standard deduction u/s 24: 3335135.00 Add: Addition in trading results: 24002905.00 …………………… Total assessed income

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

property held under (Audit objection)\n Assessment year 2016-17 Assessment of assessee-trust was completed under section\n143(3) at 'Nil' income - Revenue audit party, however, objected to finalization of retum of\nassessee-trust at 'Nil' for reason that during year, assessee received corpus donations\nwhich were not included in income for application under section 11 On basis

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S. JAGDAMBE STONE COMPANY, BHARATPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

section 22 of the Act, the assessee is the deemed owner of the land and the assessee 's contention that sub-letting this land to L&T is to be considered as 'income from house property'. The ld. CIT(A) has further held that preceding year case i.e A.Y. 2014-15 was also assessed u/s 143

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

ANIL KUMAR BATAR,SIKAR vs. PCIT-JAIPUR-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

143(3) for regular assessment and the very basis of\nreopening of the case under section 148 was on account of cash\ndeposits in the bank, then how the ld. Pr. CIT can hold that the AO has\nfailed to make the inquiry, where the scope of inquiry is limited only to\nthe extent of that issue