SHRI MANOJ MOONDHRA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

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

153(1)(b) on 29th February, 2016 determining the total income of Rs. 1,80,65,688/-, except an addition of Rs.1,79,998/- on account of disallowance of certain expenses, the AO accepted the returned income of the assessee. The AO subsequently initiated the penalty proceedings under section 271AAB of the Act by issuing the notices dated 29th February

SHRI MANOJ MOONDHRA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

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

153(1)(b) on 29th February, 2016 determining the total income of Rs. 1,80,65,688/-, except an addition of Rs.1,79,998/- on account of disallowance of certain expenses, the AO accepted the returned income of the assessee. The AO subsequently initiated the penalty proceedings under section 271AAB of the Act by issuing the notices dated 29th February

SCHOLARS EDUCATION TRUST OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

1 tosection 153 of the IT Act, 1961.\"\n11. Aggrieved by the second withdrawal of approval order of the Ld. CIT\n(Exemption), Jaipur the assessee preferred the present appeal before us on the\ngrounds mentioned hereinabove.\n12. All the grounds raised by the assessee are inter-related and inter-connected\nand relates to challenging the order

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

property is declared in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The issuance of notices under section 153A(1) for all the six assessment years does not entail altogether a fresh exercise of making a fresh assessment. Hence, the completed assessment can be interfered with

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

property is declared in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The issuance of notices under section 153A(1) for all the six assessment years does not entail altogether a fresh exercise of making a fresh assessment. Hence, the completed assessment can be interfered with

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

property is declared in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The issuance of notices under section 153A(1) for all the six assessment years does not entail altogether a fresh exercise of making a fresh assessment. Hence, the completed assessment can be interfered with

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

property is declared in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The issuance of notices under section 153A(1) for all the six assessment years does not entail altogether a fresh exercise of making a fresh assessment. Hence, the completed assessment can be interfered with

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

property is declared in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The issuance of notices under section 153A(1) for all the six assessment years does not entail altogether a fresh exercise of making a fresh assessment. Hence, the completed assessment can be interfered with

SHRI AJAY AGARWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue

153-156 of paper book) Copy of relevant page of bank statement showing the entry of payment received against sales of shares (page nos.157-164 of paper book) (C) DEMAT ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF FOLLOWING SHARES BROKERS IN RESPECT OF SALES & PURCHASE OF SHARES (Page nos. 165-167 of paper book) : Shri Ajay Agarwal, Kota. • Arihant Capital Markets Limited • Suresh Rathi Securities

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

property is declared in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The issuance of notices under section 153A(1) for all the six assessment years does not entail altogether a fresh exercise of making a fresh assessment. Hence, the completed assessment can be interfered with

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

property is declared in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. The issuance of notices under section 153A(1) for all the six assessment years does not entail altogether a fresh exercise of making a fresh assessment. Hence, the completed assessment can be interfered with

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Housing Corporation Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2013) 350 ITR 131 (Guj.) In the reasons recorded by Ld. A.O. there is no whisper that “due to failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment” the income has escaped assessment and, therefore the notice issued u/s 148 is wrong

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF),JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CENTRAL CIRCLE

153(c)(1)] is confined in its \napplication to the question of abatement\"\nProviso below sub-section (1) of section 153C of the Act was inserted by the \nFinance Act 2005 w.r.e.f. 01.06.2003 In this regard the extract of the \n\"Memorandum\" is as under.-\nUnder the existing provisions of section 153A, where the Assessing Officer is \nsatisfied that books

SHRI BANNA LAL JAT,BHILWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, theses appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. Conclusion 38. The present appeals concern AYs, 2002-03, 2005-06 and 2006-07.0n the date of the search the said assessments already stood completed. Since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search

SHRI BANNA LAL JAT,BHILWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, theses appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. Conclusion 38. The present appeals concern AYs, 2002-03, 2005-06 and 2006-07.0n the date of the search the said assessments already stood completed. Since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search

SHRI BANNA LAL JAT,BHILWARA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, theses appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

property discovered in the course of search which were not produced or not already disclosed or made known in the course of original assessment. Conclusion 38. The present appeals concern AYs, 2002-03, 2005-06 and 2006-07.0n the date of the search the said assessments already stood completed. Since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search

BABU LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

properties from the Income Tax Department:- 1. Shri Bheru Ram 2. Shri Khema Ram Choudhary 3. Shri Ram Prakash Sharma 4. M/s. Harshita Construction 5. Shri Lal Chand Sharma A copy of his current bank account along with confirmation letters/affidavits of the above said persons who are agriculturists and the amount was received by them from the Government of India

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. M/S SILVERTOSS COMMODITIES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

The appeals of the revenue stand dismissed and the cross objections of the assessee are partly allowed

153, 154, 155 & 156/Ahd/2012. (c) Ratan Kumar Sharma vs. DCIT ITA 797 & 798/Jaipur/2014. (d) Vikram Gupta vs/ DCIT ITA 174/Jaipur/2017 etc/ (e) Jadau Jewellers & Manufacturer PL vs. ACIT (686/Jaipur/2014) (xvii) Thus the essential corollary of these decisions and also the decision relied upon by the appellant is that no addition can be made in the proceedings under section 153A

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

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

153 (Karnataka) [13-12-2012])\nThe object behind the enactment of section 271(1)(c) read with the Explanations\nindicates that the said section has been enacted to provide for a remedy for loss\nof revenue. The penalty under that provision is a civil liability. Wilful concealment\nis not an essential ingredient for attracting civil liability as is the case