BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

property of the assessee was undoubtedly connected with and advantageous to the business activity of the assessee. Though it conferred upon the assessee an enduring advantage for the benefit of its business, it did not secure to the assessee any tangible, or intangible asset and further the enduring advantage gained by the assessee was chiefly to facilitate the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JPR vs. BARMER LIGNITE MINING COMPANY LIMITED, UDYOG BHAWAN JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

property of the assessee was undoubtedly connected with and advantageous to the business activity of the assessee. Though it conferred upon the assessee an enduring advantage for the benefit of its business, it did not secure to the assessee any tangible, or intangible asset and further the enduring advantage gained by the assessee was chiefly to facilitate the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. BARMER LIGNITE MINING COMPANY LIMITED, UDYOG BHAWAN, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

property of the assessee was undoubtedly connected with and advantageous to the business activity of the assessee. Though it conferred upon the assessee an enduring advantage for the benefit of its business, it did not secure to the assessee any tangible, or intangible asset and further the enduring advantage gained by the assessee was chiefly to facilitate the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. BARMER LIGNITE MINING COMPANY LIMITED, UDYOG BHAWAN, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

property of the assessee was undoubtedly connected with and advantageous to the business activity of the assessee. Though it conferred upon the assessee an enduring advantage for the benefit of its business, it did not secure to the assessee any tangible, or intangible asset and further the enduring advantage gained by the assessee was chiefly to facilitate the assessee

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

property of the assessee was undoubtedly connected with and advantageous to the business activity of the assessee. Though it conferred upon the assessee an enduring advantage for the benefit of its business, it did not secure to the assessee any tangible, or intangible asset and further the enduring advantage gained by the assessee was chiefly to facilitate the assessee

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in view of our detailed order (supra)

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

property of the assessee was undoubtedly connected with and advantageous to the business activity of the assessee. Though it conferred upon the assessee an enduring advantage for the benefit of its business, it did not secure to the assessee any tangible, or intangible asset and further the enduring advantage gained by the assessee was chiefly to facilitate the assessee

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

452 ITR 229 (SC)[28-11-2022] \ndismissed the SLP against the decision oh Hon'ble High Court. The head notes of \nthe decision are as under x x x x \nHon'ble Supreme Court Of India in the case of Bannalal Jat Constructions \n(P.) Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax [2019] 106 taxmann.com

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

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

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

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

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. ASHA JAIN, JAIPUR

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SANGEETA MANTRI, JAIPUR

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

house property, business or profession, capital gain and other sources during the year under consideration. 7. The main issues involved in this case, as found by the AO in the assessment proceedings is long term capital gain income claimed by the assessee is considered as bogus for an amount of Rs. 11,96,03,020/- and added

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

property of the assessee was undoubtedly connected with and\nadvantageous to the business activity of the assessee. Though it conferred upon the assessee an\nenduring advantage for the benefit of its business, it did not secure to the assessee any tangible,\nor intangible asset and further the enduring advantage gained by the assessee was chiefly to\nfacilitate the assessee

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIGYAN LODHA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

Property, share of profit from Partnership firms, capital gains, dividend and income from other sources. From the documents /paper submitted by the assessee, the AO found that the assessee during the year under consideration has shown Long Term Capital Gains of Rs.4,65,83,342/- and claimed exemption u/s 10(38) of the Act. The transaction of purchase/sale of shares