PRADEEP SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

271 AAC were initiated as the AO opined that the appellant had\nincome from an undisclosed sources u/s.69A of the IT Act. Since the penalty\nproceedings initiated were backed by valid reasons, this ground of appeal is\ndismissed. Further, Penalty proceedings were initiated and penalty if any will be\nlevied by the AO by a separate order. Therefore, this ground

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)

u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 153A: 8.1 In Pr. CIT vs. Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 0001 (Delhi), it was held that: “…………. Thus, it is clear that when the A.O. has accepted the revised return filed by the assessee under Section 153A, no occasion arises to refer to the previous return filed under Section

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)

cash deposit in bank account of Rs.5,30,000/- and interest on savings bank account of Rs.9,660/- has been confirmed by CIT(A). The AO issued show cause notice for penalty proceedings on 05/10.2015. Appellant submitted it's response before the AO. However, AO not found this response tenable and levied penalty of Rs.1,10,718/- u/s 271

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

deposit or specified sum so repaid (2) Any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint Commissioner. Provided that any penalty under sub-section (1), on or alter the 1st day of April, 2025, shall be imposed by the Assessing Officer. *275 Bar of limitation for imposing penalties (1) No order imposing a penalty under this

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

deposit or specified sum so repaid (2) Any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint Commissioner. Provided that any penalty under sub-section (1), on or alter the 1st day of April, 2025, shall be imposed by the Assessing Officer. *275 Bar of limitation for imposing penalties (1) No order imposing a penalty under this

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

deposited by way of the Self-assessment tax and TDS and was\nduly accepted by the AO as well. Admittedly, there is no upward variation made\nby the AO in the declared income.\n11.2 The subsequent validly filed ROI substitutes the earlier one:\nIt is well settled that if ROI has been filed u/s 139 within the permissible time limit

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

deposited by way of the Self-assessment tax and TDS and was\nduly accepted by the AO as well. Admittedly, there is no upward variation made\nby the AO in the declared income.\n11.2 The subsequent validly filed ROI substitutes the earlier one:\nIt is well settled that if ROI has been filed u/s 139 within the permissible time limit

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

deposited by way of the Self-assessment tax and TDS and was\nduly accepted by the AO as well. Admittedly, there is no upward variation made\nby the AO in the declared income.\n11.2 The subsequent validly filed ROI substitutes the earlier one:\nIt is well settled that if ROI has been filed u/s 139 within the permissible time limit

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

deposited by way of the Self-assessment tax and TDS and was\nduly accepted by the AO as well. Admittedly, there is no upward variation made\nby the AO in the declared income.\n11.2 The subsequent validly filed ROI substitutes the earlier one:\nIt is well settled that if ROI has been filed u/s 139 within the permissible time limit

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

deposited by way of the Self-assessment tax and TDS and was\nduly accepted by the AO as well. Admittedly, there is no upward variation made\nby the AO in the declared income.\n11.2 The subsequent validly filed ROI substitutes the earlier one:\nIt is well settled that if ROI has been filed u/s 139 within the permissible time limit

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)

deposited the tax along with the computation of income in response to the said notice vide letter dated 25.03.2019. It only after this the AO issued notice u/s 148 (i.e. on 30.03.2019). The assessee on his own after receiving notice u/s 148 voluntarily declared the income in ROI and paid taxes of thereon i.e. even before providing reason recorded

PEEYUSH AGARWAL,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result Ground and 1 and 2 raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

u/s 251(2) of I.Tax Act as this finding is amount to enhancement of assessment/tax liability. The provisions of section 251(2) as stood for the assessment years under consideration is as under:­ “2) The Commissioner (Appeals)] shall not enhance an assessment or a penalty or reduce the amount of refund unless the appellant has had a reasonable opportunity

ASHOK NARIYANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

penalties.\nHowever, during the course of assessment, Ld. AO observed that since,\nthe cash deposited in old currency noted by the assessee in his bank\naccounts is Rs.2,88,82,000/- against the surrendered amount of Rs.\n1,58,00,000/- during the survey proceedings, therefore the balance\namount of cash deposited of Rs.1,30,82,000/- in old currency

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

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

u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s.153A:\nIn Pr. CIT vs. Neeraj Jindal (2017) 393 ITR 0001 (Delhi), it was held that:\n\"Thus, it is clear that when the A.O. has accepted the revised return filed by the assessee under Section 153A, no occasion arises to refer to the previous return filed under Section 139 of the Act. For all purposes

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

deposit or\nspecified sum so repaid\n(2) Any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint\nCommissioner.\nProvided that any penalty under sub-section (1), on or alter the 1st day of April, 2025,\nshall be imposed by the Assessing Officer.\n*275 Bar of limitation for imposing penalties (1) No order imposing a penalty

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

deposit or\nspecified sum so repaid\n(2) Any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint\nCommissioner.\nProvided that any penalty under sub-section (1), on or alter the 1st day of April, 2025,\nshall be imposed by the Assessing Officer.\n*275 Bar of limitation for imposing penalties (1) No order imposing a penalty

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

deposit or\nspecified sum so repaid\n(2) Any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint\nCommissioner.\nProvided that any penalty under sub-section (1), on or alter the 1st day of April, 2025,\nshall be imposed by the Assessing Officer.\n*275 Bar of limitation for imposing penalties (1) No order imposing a penalty

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

deposit or\nspecified sum so repaid\n(2) Any penalty imposable under sub-section (1) shall be imposed by the Joint\nCommissioner.\nProvided that any penalty under sub-section (1), on or alter the 1st day of April, 2025,\nshall be imposed by the Assessing Officer.\n*275 Bar of limitation for imposing penalties (1) No order imposing a penalty

CHAND MONAMMAD,AJMER vs. ITO, WARD 1(3), AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

cash deposits in bank a/c's of Appellant is hereby upheld and confirmed, GOA No. 2 is dismissed. 7.4 GOA No. 3: Charging of interest u/s 234A and 234B. Interest u/s 234A and 234B is mandatory and not discretionary as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anjum M.H. Ghaswala