SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Housing Corporation Limited vs ACIT (2009) 32 SOT 207 (Ahd ITAT), it has been held that capital receipts are eligible to be excluded by virtue of section 115JB (5) but not deduction u/s 80IA. 50. In view of several binding judicial precedents of Honourable High courts stated above holding that since 115JB(5) does not specify any particular claim

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

Housing Corporation Limited vs ACIT (2009) 32\nSOT 207 (Ahd ITAT), it has been held that capital receipts are\neligible to be excluded by virtue of section 115JB (5) but not\ndeduction u/s 80IA.\n50. In view of several binding judicial precedents of Honourable\nHigh courts stated above holding that since 115JB(5) does not\nspecify any particular claim

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER

Housing Corporation Limited vs ACIT (2009) 32 SOT 207 (Ahd ITAT), it has been held that capital receipts are eligible to be excluded by virtue of section 115JB (5) but not deduction u/s 80IA.\n50. In view of several binding judicial precedents of Honourable High courts stated above holding that since 115JB(5) does not specify any particular claim

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

PINCITY JEWLHOUSE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, CC, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the date of hearing." 3. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 58 days in filing of the present appeal by the assessee for which the Id. AR of 3

Properties Pvt. Ltd. v. PCIT 14 17 {2023 (08) TMI 673} ITAT - New Delhi 4. Paramjit Singh v. PCIT 18 28 {2016 (12) TMI 799} ITAT -Chandigarh 5. Refex Industries Ltd. v. DCIT 29 34 {2014 (11) TMI 653} ITAT -Chennai RULE OF CONSISTENCY 6. Radha Soami Satsang v. CIT 35 41 {1991 (11) TMI 2} Supreme Court SCOPE

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

4 M/s Ganpati Global (P) Ltd. vs. ITO were temporarily available idle funds which were invested in short term deposits, before they could be used in the setting-up of business/ construction of assets for business purposes. 6. It was submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) while trying to distinguish the case of Bokaro Steel Ltd with Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals

KAILASH CHAND MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRALCIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

house of the assessee in a statement\nrecorded u/s.132(4) of the Act vide question no. 22 recorded on\n29.07.2016 assessee admitted that he has incurred expenditure on the\nmarriage of his son Vind and two daughters of his young brother. Since the\nassessee has not submitted any details/ document in compliance to various\nnotices the expenditure to the extent

KAILASH CHAND MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

house of the assessee in a statement recorded u/s. 132(4) of the Act vide question no. 22 recorded on 29.07.2016 assessee admitted that he has incurred expenditure on the marriage of his son Vind and two daughters of his young brother. Since the assessee has not submitted any details/ document in compliance to various notices the expenditure

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SH. TARA CHAND GUPTA, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम ACIT, Vs. Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Kesh

House Property Income and Income from Other Sources. The proceedings of assessment of income were initiated by issuing of notices u/s 143(2) of the Act on 08.08.2019 & 142(1) of the Act on 03-09-2019 and served online on the e-mail of the assessee. Notice u/s 142(1) dated 03-09-2019 was issued to the assessee

SH. TARACHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA. Nos.447 to 449/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2017-18 Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Keshav Nagar Sch 13, Alwar बनाम Vs. ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar स्थायी लेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAYPC 5777 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent आयकर अपील सं./ITA. No. 514/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 ACIT, Central Circle, Alwar बनाम Shri Tarachand Gupta 9 Ke

House Property Income and Income from Other Sources. The proceedings of assessment of income were initiated by issuing of notices u/s 143(2) of the Act on 08.08.2019 & 142(1) of the Act on 03-09-2019 and served online on the e-mail of the assessee. Notice u/s 142(1) dated 03-09-2019 was issued to the assessee

PRAMILA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(5), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house property, business, capital gain and other\nsources (APB 2 – 3). It is seen that assessee has claimed long term capital\ngain of Rs.1,37,83,051/- as exempt u/s 10(38) of I.T. Act. After filing the\nreturn (APB 1), the case was reopened u/s 148 / 147 and while doing so\nthe ld. AO has observed at page

SH. TARACHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result the appeal filed by the revenue in ITA no

House Property Income and\nIncome from Other Sources. The proceedings of assessment of\nincome were initiated by issuing of notices u/s 143(2) of the Act on\n08.08.2019 & 142(1) of the Act on 03-09-2019 and served online\non the e-mail of the assessee. Notice u/s 142(1) dated 03-09-2019\nwas issued to the assessee

KAILASH CHAND MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, , JAIPUR

house of the assessee in a statement\nrecorded u/s.132(4) of the Act vide question no. 22 recorded on\n29.07.2016 assessee admitted that he has incurred expenditure on the\nmarriage of his son Vind and two daughters of his young brother. Since the\nassessee has not submitted any details/ document in compliance to various\nnotices the expenditure to the extent

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

property during the F.Y 2011-12 to 2013-14. The re-assessment order was passed u/s 143(3)/147 of the Act by making addition u/s 68 to the tune of Rs 90,00,385 on account of share application/premium received from M/s Agarani Credit and Finvest Pvt. Ltd.,M/s Darshan Enclave Pvt. Ltd., M/s Harsharatna Investment

SH. ASHOK KUMAR PORWAL,JHALAWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

4. It is submitted that section 269SS falls in Chapter XXB which deals with requirement as to the mode of acceptance, payment or repayment in certain cases to counter act evasion of tax. The scope of and effect of section 269SS is elaborated in circular no. 387 dated 06 July 1984 as follows: 32.1 Unaccounted cash found in the course

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

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

255 (SC) (DPB 53-56)wherein it was held:\n“In the instant case, the Commissioner had not recorded any reason\nwhatsoever for coming to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer was\nerroneous in deciding that the power subsidy was capital receipt. Given\nthe fact that the decision of the jurisdictional High Court was operative at\nthe material time

RAMA SHANKER PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Housing Finance Ltd. and remaining amount through bank account.\nThereafter, the AO noted that the assessee has made cash deposit of Rs.4,28,000/-\nin the bank account on the different dates. The AO asked the source of cash deposit\nin the bank account. In response thereto, the assessee has stated that the same was\nout of his and family

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, based on the discussion so recorded here in above both

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

255/- 7. As the assessee aggrieved from the order of the assessing officer he preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeals-4, Jaipur. As the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed Assessee preferred appeal against additions sustained by ld. CIT(A), whereas department is in appeal in respect of relief granted