GANESH CHAWLA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.” Sh. Genesh Chawla Vs. Acit

156 of the P.B. In this letter the Municipal Commissioner has very clearly mentioned that the assessee was getting constructed a new house property after dismantling an old house. Therefore, the assessee produced irrefutable evidence to prove that the assessee has 5 Sh. Genesh Chawla vs. ACIT constructed a new house after demolition of old house. The ld. AR then

SMT. BIRMA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

156 ITR 323 (SC) as discussed earlier. The facts of the case are entirely different. In the present case the terms and conditions have been agreed to by the appellant herself, they were not beyond her control. Thus, if the conditions agreed by the appellant are such as would result in not being able to fulfill the requirements

SH. NARENDAR KUMAR AGARWAL,JAWALI BHAWAN, STATION ROAD, ALWAR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property by executing 3 sale deeds dt. 28.09.2012 (PB 59-67), dt. 29.04.2013 and dt. 11.02.2014 for Rs.40 lacs plus stamp duty expenditure of 15 Sh. Narendar Kumar Agarwal v. PCIT, Jaipur-1 Rs.2,34,500/- and incurred expenditure of Rs.7,77,000/- (PB 31-34) on construction, section 50C is not applicable as held by various decisions including

M/S. GANPATI GLOBAL PRIVATE LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD1(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

156 ITR 542) categorically held: "In this case, admittedly, the borrowing has not been made exclusively and solely for the purpose of earning interest in which case alone it should be taken as an income which should be deducted from the interest receipts." An assessee-company may have raised its capital by issue of shares or debentures or by borrowing

LAL CHAND MEENA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7-3, JAIPUR

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

houses, hotels, motels and resorts, etc & other tourism related activities. In view of above and the specific definition of transfer given in section 2(47) read with section 45(3), no capital gain can be assessed in the hands of the assessee and therefore the addition made by the AO and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) be deleted

J.S.FOURWHEEL MOTORS (P) LTD ,ALWAR vs. ACIT. CIRCLE 1 ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

House Property and the Id AO has not given any opportunity before making the addition. Thus the addition so made is just on the presumption, assumption and surmises of the ld. AO and the CIT (Appeals), has erred in not giving any finding thereon and also erred in not disposing off the this ground on merit. 4. Section 24 rent

INDEXONE TRADECONE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

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

properties idle and was paying rent of guest house, the expenses claimed on rent of Rs. 156,000/- on account of guest house is hereby disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee.” 13. The relevant findings of the ld. CIT(A) is contained at para 3.4.2 which is reproduced as under:- “3.4.2 During the year under

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

house property on April 26, 1991 The Assessing Officer did not accept this explanation and taxed this amount, ie difference of Rs. 1,40,000 as short-term capital gain. No appeal was preferred Therefore, that addition had become final. Thereafter, the Assessing Officer initiated the penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income

SUWALKA AND SUWALKA PROPERTIES AND BUILDERS PVT LTD,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, KOTA, KOTA, RAJASTHAN

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

section 145(3) while making the addition. The ITAT in the above order also held that the subject matter of assessment is the matters which were taken up by the Assessing Officer during the scrutiny assessment are very much subject matter of appeal so far as the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) exercising enhancement of income. In this case also

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

house property? No. The case laws cited by assessee are not relevant as in the case of assessee nexus between borrowed funds and investment as clearly established. The payments were directly made from overdraft account only and also admitted by assessee. Considering the above, disallowance of interest of Rs.20,45,751/- is confirmed. This Ground of appeal is, therefore, dismissed

SHRI SANJAY JINDAL,NASIRABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

House No. 70 situated at Village-Shilloar Raicher Panvel District Raigad), as the same was solely owned, used possessed and was acquired by investing its own funds by the company-M/s. Jindal Roadways Pvt. Ltd despite all evidences as regards payments by company, used of asset, depreciation and credits into Company’s Account and Depreciated Asset A/c on record

M/S JINDAL ROADWAYS PVT. LTD.,NASIRABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

House No. 70 situated at Village-Shilloar Raicher Panvel District Raigad), as the same was solely owned, used possessed and was acquired by investing its own funds by the company-M/s. Jindal Roadways Pvt. Ltd despite all evidences as regards payments by company, used of asset, depreciation and credits into Company’s Account and Depreciated Asset A/c on record

MACRO PROPRIETIES PRIVATE LIMITED,M 28 INCOME TAX COLONY TONK ROAD JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No.174 TO 177/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear : 2013-14 TO 2016-17 M/s. Macro Properties Pvt. Ltd.M-28, Income Tax Colony, Tonk Road Jaipur cuke Vs. The DCIT Central Circle-2 LIC Building, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCM 3633 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri C.M. Agarwal, CA jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri JameshKurian, CI

section 153C of the Act qua the necessity to establish the correlation the document wise with the assessment eyars in question was considered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT-III, Pune Vs Singhad Technical Education Society (reported in (2017) 84 Taxmann.com 290} … Para 10- The Tribunal further noted that the said Mr T John Rajasekhar

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. RISHIRAJ SINGH, JHALAWAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

House Property. We are therefore, of the considered view that since there is\nno change in the facts of the case, the rule of consistency applies in accordance with Hon'ble\nSupreme Court in the case of Radhaswami Satsang vs. CIT (supra).\"\nGround of Appeal No.3\nWhether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC

BHAGWAN SINGH POSWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 1(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Or During The Course Of The Hearing Of The Appeal.”

Section 144 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') dated 19.02.2014. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- 2 Bhagwan Singh Poswal vs. ITO “1.The ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 1,73,78,350/- u/s 68. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the said addition

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

BHAWANI SHANKAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(1) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

156, Sindhu Nagar, Vs. Ward 4(1), Murlipura, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AEHPG 6497 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Vishal Gupta (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 16/03/2023 mn?kks"k.kk

HIRALAL VIJAWAT , BHAWANIMANDI,BHAWANIMANDI vs. ACIT / DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA, KOTA

156 of the Act and challan for payment of tax, if\r\npayable, is hereby issued. Penalty u/s 271AAC of the Income Tax Act is initiated as\r\nassessed income includes income chargeable u/s 115BBE by way of issue of notice u/s\r\n274 r.w.s 271AAC of the Act. Penalty notice u/s 274 r.w.s 271AAC of the Act is issued