DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. LATE SMT. PUSHPA GOYAL, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section 292C is that where any books of accounts or other documents etc. is found in the possession and control of any person in course of search u/s 132, it may be presumed that such books of accounts or other documents etc belonging to such persons and the contents of the same are true. Therefore the data found from

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. LATE SMT. PUSHPA GOYAL, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section 292C is that where any books of accounts or other documents etc. is found in the possession and control of any person in course of search u/s 132, it may be presumed that such books of accounts or other documents etc belonging to such persons and the contents of the same are true. Therefore the data found from

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCL-1,, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MOHAN SUKHANI, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section 132 (4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 whereby the Act itself allows the creation of a legal fiction by making certain presumptions. 9.3 When a presumption is being made, it is being presumed that the name "Mohan Sukhani" denotes no one else but the assessee under consideration and that the entries of unaccounted capital, surplus, cash loans and interest

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAM GOPAL SARRAF, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section 132 (4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 whereby the Act itself allows the creation of a legal fiction by making certain presumptions. 8.3 When a presumption is being made, it is being presumed that the name "RGS" denotes no one else but the assessee under consideration and that the entries of unaccounted capital, surplus, cash loans and interest pertain

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCL-1,, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MOHAN SUKHANI, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section 132 (4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 whereby the Act itself allows the creation of a legal fiction by making certain presumptions. 9.3 When a presumption is being made, it is being presumed that the name "Mohan Sukhani" denotes no one else but the assessee under consideration and that the entries of unaccounted capital, surplus, cash loans and interest

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAM GOPAL SARRAF, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section 132 (4A) of the I.T. Act, 1961 whereby the Act itself allows the creation of a legal fiction by making certain presumptions. 8.3 When a presumption is being made, it is being presumed that the name "RGS" denotes no one else but the assessee under consideration and that the entries of unaccounted capital, surplus, cash loans and interest pertain

ROHIT LADIWALA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

property has been found as a consequence\nof the search, the same would also be taken into consideration. The requirement\nof assessment or reassessment under the said section has to be read in the\ncontext of Sections 132 or 132A of the Act, inasmuch as, in case nothing\nincriminating is found on account of such search or requisition, then

RAJESH PRODUCTS,TONK ,RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

245D(1) of the Act,\ndespite the exhibits not being seized from the possession of the Appellant\n(but seized from the partners of the Appellant and Sh.TCJ) and belonging\nto a third party i.e. RT Industries.\n17. That the Ld.AO again ignored the fact that Sh.TCJ was not a partner in the\nAppellant Firm, therefore, an unrelated third party

UMESH SABOO,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal filed by the assessee are partly\nallowed

property, Business and Other sources. The assessee is a\nfinance broker and earned brokerage income in his proprietary\nconcern M/s Vihan Associates. Statutory notice as required u/s.\n143(2) of the Act and notice u/s 142(1) were also issued to the\nassessee and information and details pertaining to the case\nrelevant to assessment of his income were called

UMESH SABOO,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, JAIPUR

property, Business and Other sources. The assessee is a\nfinance broker and earned brokerage income in his proprietary\nconcern M/s Vihan Associates. Statutory notice as required u/s.\n143(2) of the Act and notice u/s 142(1) were also issued to the\nassessee and information and details pertaining to the case\nrelevant to assessment of his income were called