BITTHAL DAS PARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3 , JAIPUR

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

Bench: Him. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

capital gain at Rs.6,19,338/- has been disclosed, Accordingly, the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A of the I.T. Act, 1961 was completed on 3 Sh. Bittal Das Parwal vs. ACIT 29.12.2017 and income was assessed at Rs.6.18,74,055/- by making the following additions and also penalty proceedings u/s 271

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

u/s\n271(1)(c) holding that:\n“Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Penalty – For concealment of\nincome – Assessment year 2011-12 - Assessee filed return for AY 2011-12,\ndeclaring income and capital gains

AJOY SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

u/s\n271(1)(c) holding that:\n“Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Penalty – For concealment of\nincome – Assessment year 2011-12 - Assessee filed return for AY 2011-12,\ndeclaring income and capital gains

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

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

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

penalty order - High Court by impugned order held that, on facts, no substantial question of law arose from Tribunal's order and, thus, same deserved to be upheld - Whether Special leave petition filed against impugned order was to be dismissed - Held, yes [Paras 3 and 4] [In favour of assessee].” 9 Supporting case laws u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

u/s\n271(1)(c) holding that:\n“Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Penalty – For concealment of\nincome – Assessment year 2011-12 - Assessee filed return for AY 2011-12,\ndeclaring income and capital gains

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

u/s\n271(1)(c) holding that:\n“Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Penalty – For concealment of\nincome – Assessment year 2011-12 - Assessee filed return for AY 2011-12,\ndeclaring income and capital gains

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

u/s\n271(1)(c) holding that:\n“Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 – Penalty – For concealment of\nincome – Assessment year 2011-12 - Assessee filed return for AY 2011-12,\ndeclaring income and capital gains

POOJA UPADHYAY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

penalty. This intention is also supported by the further fact that the ROI filed u/s 148 is deemed to be an ROI filed u/s 139 and all the provisions of the Act shall apply accordingly. Looking from this angle in absence of any difference in the returned and assessed income. 4. Supporting case laws u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA , JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION, JAIPUR

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

penalty order - High Court by impugned order held that, on facts, no substantial question of law arose from Tribunal's order and, thus, same deserved to be upheld - Whether Special leave petition filed against impugned order was to be dismissed - Held, yes [Paras 3 and 4] [In favour of assessee].”\n9 Supporting case laws u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s.148:\n9.1

OMPRAKASH,DHOLPUR vs. ITO WARD 4 BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes as indicated hereinabove\nOrder pronounced in the open court on\n17/01/2025

capital gain.\n3. That order of learned Assessing Authority is based on assumptions and presumptions and\nagainst real facts of the case.\n4. That learned Assessing Authority grossly erred in law and facts in making penalty of Rs.\n203275/- U/s 271

JAMNA DEVI SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed with no orders as to costs

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

penalty u/s 271(1)© of the Act as confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) ‘’ UNDISPUTED FACTUAL BACKGROUND 7 SMT. JAMNA DEVI SHARMA VS ITO, WRD 7(2), JAIPUR Registration of land in the name of other family members - to camouflage the title - to protect the ownership from ongoing disputes - not a transfer and therefore - no capital gain

BIRENDRA SINGH NIRBHAY,SIRSI ROAD JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO WARD 3(1) JAIPUR, NCRB INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 69C of Income Tax Act, 1961\namounting Rs.123680\nThe Id CIT (Appeal) had arbitrary assumed that assessee would have incurred\n4% expenditure on sales proceeds of shares on account of commission and\nother expenses to realize such bogus capital gain and added Rs.123680/- as\nunexplained expenditure. The Ld CIT (Appeal) had restricted the addition to the\nextent

POORAN SINGH,DHOLPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.

271(1)(c) of the Act 4. Decision:- I have carefully examined the penalty order passed by the AO, and other facts of the case available on record. 4.1. The appellant is an agriculturist and had failed to file the return of income for the year under consideration. The assessment u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act was completed

POORAN SINGH,DHOLPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.

271(1)(c) of the Act 4. Decision:- I have carefully examined the penalty order passed by the AO, and other facts of the case available on record. 4.1. The appellant is an agriculturist and had failed to file the return of income for the year under consideration. The assessment u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act was completed

POORAN SINGH,DHOLPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, BHARATPUR, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Assessee Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.

271(1)(c) of the Act 4. Decision:- I have carefully examined the penalty order passed by the AO, and other facts of the case available on record. 4.1. The appellant is an agriculturist and had failed to file the return of income for the year under consideration. The assessment u/s. 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act was completed

SHRI RAMCHAND LAXMANDAS BABANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ ITA No. 192/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2011-12 Shri Ramchand Laxmandas Babani P.No.2, Shiv Shankar Colony Janta Colony, Jaipur – 302 004 (Raj) बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward -6(4) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: ANYPB 6571 A अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे/Assesseeby : Shri Mohit Balani, Advocate (Thru" V.C.) राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Shri Gautam Sin

capital gain of Rs.10,72,028/- and income from other sources Rs.15,368/-. Accordingly, the assessment u/s 147/143(3) of the I.T. Act had been completed on 15-12-2018 at the total income of Rs.12,77,950/-. Hence, the AO initiated penalty u/s 271

ASHEESH SHARMA,KOTA vs. LD. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Income tax Act, 1961 on difference of income (Income 27,550 & Short Term Capital Gain

VINAYA SHARMA,KOTA vs. LD. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

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

penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Income tax Act, 1961 on difference of income (Income 27,550 & Short Term Capital Gain