SHRI MADAN LAL SABOO,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.” 2. Ground No. 1 Is General In Nature & Does Not Require Any Specific Adjudication As The Assessee Has Not Advanced Any Argument As To How The Order Passed By The Ao As Well As The Impugned Order Of The Ld. Cit(A) Is Bad In Law.

house is being made, the benefit of deduction U/s 54 is allowable to the assessee. The conditions prescribed U/s 54 of the Act are satisfied in the present case therefore, the benefit of the said section cannot be denied to the assessee. He has referred to the map of the property in question which are also annexed to the sale

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)

234-238/Vol-2 20/1025356837(1) 16th Dec 2020 ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2020- 239-240/Vol-2 21/1029027261(1) Above notices were duly responded by below mentioned submissions:- S. No Date of Copy at PB Submission page 5 Career Point Limited, Kota. 12th Oct 2019 ITBA/AST/S/143(2)/2019- 15/Vol-1 20/1018220568(1) 09th Jan 2021 ITBA/AST/F/142(1)/2019- 16-17/Vol-1 20/1025356837(1) 09th

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)

234 (Guj).’’ 4.4 It is observed that the AO has provided all the details, the appellant has attended the re-assessment proceedings from time to time and has filed the details as sought by the AO. It is also observed that the appellant has never pursued the alleged objection filed against the notice u/s 148 of the Act before

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GURU PRAGYA INFRA (P) LTD., JAIPUR

234 Taxman 435 where assessee claimed deduction u/s 80-IB with respect to housing project consisting of 43 units which was disallowed on ground that Building Use (BU) permission and completion certificate was granted only with respect to 20 units within a period of four years from date of approval of project by local authority and not with respect

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

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

234 (Kerala)/[2016] 240 Taxman 168 (Kerala)/[2016] 385 ITR 624 (Kerala)/[2016] 287 CTR 187 (Kerala) (22-03-2016] as under- "Neither under section 132 or under section 153A, is the phraseology "incriminating used by the Parliament Therefore, any material which was unearthed during search operations or any statement made during the course of search by the assessee

GHODAWAT HOTELS PVT.LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT(HQ), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

House, Jaipur purchased by the assessee on 05.08.2002 for the total cost at Rs. 1,01,97,208/-. 13 M/s. Ghodawat Hotels (P) Ltd. vs. DCIT (HQ), Circle- 6, Jaipur . Thereafter a lease agreement was entered into between the assessee and RFC on 15.03.2003, copy of which is available in the paper book filed by the assessee. As per this

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

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 explained

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

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 explained

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

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 explained

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

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 explained

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

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 explained

YUWAM EDUCATION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

234 days, no evidences and no reconciliation have been filed by the appellant in support of the lower figures of profit, the presumption u/s 292C has not been proved wrong by the appellant, thus the U Turn is not a valid retraction. In the appeal, the Appellant has also not placed on record the complete facts of the issue/income

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRASHANT GUPTA 301, ANUKAMPA MANSION-I, M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR, M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

234/-. In penalty proceedings, the assessee filed explanation. However, the A.O. rejected the same and levied the penalty of Rs. 62,70,000/- U/s 271AAB(1)(a) of the Act. 4. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty after observing as under: “5. I have considered the facts of the case, gone through the assessment order

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

234 (Kerala) a under: "Section 153A, read with section 132 and 132A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Search and seizure - Assessment in case of (Scope of) - Assessment years 2002 03 to 2006-07 - Whether where there was a disclosure made by giving a statement during course of search, Assessing Officer, by virtue of power conferred on him under section

SMT. NIRMALA GOYAL,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

property was not registered in his name. However, after taking into consideration the provisions of section 54F, the Id. CIT (A) found that the only condition for claiming exemption under section 54F is that the asset transferred is long term capital asset, not being a residential house. The assessee has 9 Smt. Nirmala Goyal, Ajmer Vs. The ACIT, Ajmer

NITIN KEDIA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

house property, business of property developers, capital gain on sale of plots, interest and other income. Search and seizure operations u/s 132(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 were carried out by Income Tax department over the assessee group on 19.11.2016. Notice U/s 153A of the Act was issued in response to notice issued u/s 153A

M/S. KEDIA REAL ESTATE LLP,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

house property, business of property developers, capital gain on sale of plots, interest and other income. Search and seizure operations u/s 132(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 were carried out by Income Tax department over the assessee group on 19.11.2016. Notice U/s 153A of the Act was issued in response to notice issued u/s 153A

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S. KEDIA REAL ESTATE LLP, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas appeals of the assessee are allowed in part

house property, business of property developers, capital gain on sale of plots, interest and other income. Search and seizure operations u/s 132(1) of Income Tax Act, 1961 were carried out by Income Tax department over the assessee group on 19.11.2016. Notice U/s 153A of the Act was issued in response to notice issued u/s 153A

SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CEN. CIR-2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Section 68 Case pertains to Asst. Year 1966-67 Decision in favour of: Assessee Cash credits—Addition under s. 68—ITO can make addition under s. 68 as income from undisclosed sources, simultaneously with addition to trading results— However, assessee can claim the addition under s. 68 as covered by intangible additions to trading results—In the present case