JAGDISH KUMAR ARORA,BHAWANIMANDI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

house property, income from business and income from other sources. The appellant is a doctor and running the hospital in the name of JK Hospital at Bhawanimandi. As stated by the appellant he is a shareholder in Rajat City Developers Ltd and a partner in a partnership firm i.e. M/s Silver Wings Life Spaces engaged in the business of real

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.”

property to "B" for a consideration of RS. 100 crore and receive only a consideration of 1.00 crore and it is mentioned in the transfer instrument that balance of consideration would he paid after 20 years then no tax can be levied on such balance consideration of Rs. 99.00 crore which has not been received as per the contention

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

269 Taxman 508 (Madras)/[2019] 418 ITR 442 (Madras) [26-03-2019), it is held by the Hon'ble Madras High Court as under:- 8. In our opinion, Section 69B providing for amounts of investments in Bullion, Jewellery or other valuable articles (including excess Stocks as well) would have been more appropriate Section to be indicated in the orders passed

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

269-UD of the Income Tax Act, namely, the compulsory purchase of the property. It was observed that though the time frame within which an order for compulsory purchase has to be made is fairly tight one but urgency is not such that it would preclude a reasonable opportunity of being heard. A presumption of an attempt to evade

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

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

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

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, 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)

house 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, 698 and 69C treat unexplained investments, unexplained money, bullion, etc., and unexplained expenditure as deemed income 14 Yuwam Education Pvt. Ltd. Jaipur vs. DCIT where the nature and source of investment, acquisition or expenditure

BHOPAL SINGH SHEKHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. JT. CIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

property and other sources. Return of income was filed on 31/03/2009 declaring total income of Rs. 1,34,790/-, which was ITA 268/JP/2017_ 2 Bhopal Singh Shekhawat Vs Jt.CIT processed U/s 143(1) of the Act. Notice U/s 148 of the Act was issued and the assessment was completed U/s 143(3) read with Section

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

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

House vs. ITO (1995) 53TTJ (Coch-Trib) 293, it is held that there is a material difference on the question of onus between section 68 and section 69. If the case falls u/s 68 of the Act, the onus is on the assessee to adduce evidence that the credits in the accounts are genuine. In a case under section

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

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

House vs. ITO (1995) 53TTJ (Coch-Trib) 293, it is held that there is a material difference on the question of onus between section 68 and section 69. If the case falls u/s 68 of the Act, the onus is on the assessee to adduce evidence that the credits in the accounts are genuine. In a case under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS LLP, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

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

House vs. ITO (1995) 53TTJ (Coch-Trib) 293, it is held that there is a material difference on the question of onus between section 68 and section 69. If the case falls u/s 68 of the Act, the onus is on the assessee to adduce evidence that the credits in the accounts are genuine. In a case under section

KAMAKSHI HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

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

house as on date comes to Rs. 1,62,84,560/-. 3. The long term capital gain on sale of property at D-112 and tax thereon works out as under:- Amount Particulars (in Rs.) Sale consideration of property 3,50,00,000 Less: Brokerage Paid 3,50,000 3,46,50,000 Less: Purchase cost

SURYA SINGHAL,KOTA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

house construction\nexpenses and taxed the same as per provisions of section 115BBE of Income Tax\nAct, 1961. The assessee being aggrieved from the additions made by the ld. A.O.,\nfiled the appeal before CIT (A), but could not get success there and the appeal of\nthe assessee was dismissed by CIT (A) vide order dated

JUHI BHANDARI, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

house of Shri Rajendran,\nare now unavailable and the learned counsel for the Revenue has no answer for\nthe same. On these premise, the assessment order made for the Assessment years\n2015-16, 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19 requires to be quashed.\n23. 3. That reliance by the Assessing Officer / DRP in their respective orders upon\ncertain whatsapp

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

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.On the date of the search the said assessments already stood completed. Since no incriminating material was unearthed during the search, no additions could