CHANDRA PRAKASH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, ground raised by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

Long Term Capital Gain and is being disallowed and added back to the total income of the assessee treating the same as income from other sources. Since assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of income separately it is a fit case for initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271

NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Long Term Capital Gain/Loss in its books of account and took advantage for different financial years. The details of the trading of shares in the said scrip made by the assessee during F.Y. 2012-13 relevant to Α.Υ. 2013-14 is as under Name of the beneficiary Script Total value of the script sold during

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

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

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

u/s 132 (4A) does not apply in this case. No statements whatsoever were recorded of Shri KailashKhandelwal in this regard from whose possession the said Pen Drive was found during the course of search. The assessee has fully explained the entries as appearing in the books of the assessee other than the ones appearing under the last column for which

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. SHRI VASUDEV AGRAWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

long term capital gain was already declared in the original return of income filed U/s 139(1) of the Act and was also duly recorded in the books of account, therefore, the same cannot be treated as concealed income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied U/s 271

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , KOTA vs. SHRI RAJENDRA AGRAWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

long term capital gain was already declared in the original return of income filed U/s 139(1) of the Act and was also duly recorded in the books of account, therefore, the same cannot be treated as concealed income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied U/s 271

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. JYOTI AGARWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

long term capital gain was already declared in the original return of income filed U/s 139(1) of the Act and was also duly recorded in the books of account, therefore, the same cannot be treated as concealed income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied U/s 271

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. SMT. INDIRA AGRAWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

long term capital gain was already declared in the original return of income filed U/s 139(1) of the Act and was also duly recorded in the books of account, therefore, the same cannot be treated as concealed income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied U/s 271

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. SHRI AJAY AGARWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

long term capital gain was already declared in the original return of income filed U/s 139(1) of the Act and was also duly recorded in the books of account, therefore, the same cannot be treated as concealed income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied U/s 271

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. SMT. MALTI AGARWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

long term capital gain was already declared in the original return of income filed U/s 139(1) of the Act and was also duly recorded in the books of account, therefore, the same cannot be treated as concealed income of the assessee. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the penalty levied U/s 271

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

long term capital gain remained to be taxed. Therefore, it is clearly established that the assessee deliberately concealed her income to the tune of Rs.1,14,75,791/- and it is only disclosed when the assessee’s case has been selected for scrutiny u/s 143(3) of the I.T.Act, 1961. Accordingly, penalty proceedings u/s 271