VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

justice. In support, reliance was placed on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. CIT 229 ITR 383. After hearing both the parties, the additional ground being a purely legal ground, the same is being admitted for adjudication. 12. The ld AR submitted that any notice issued under section 274 read

RAMESH CHAND BANSAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, AJMER

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

271(1)(c) concealed particulars of yours income or furnished inaccurate particulars of income” – penalty proceedings initiated without specifying the limb of reasons in the penalty notice to impose penalty – penalty was initiated whether for concealment of income or for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income – whether notice invalid? Held: Yes Whether the defect in notice is curable u/s 292B? Held

SUPERFINE HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6,, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

justice are\noffended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be\nimposed up on the assessee.\nThe penalty proceedings are distinct from assessment\nproceedings. The proceedings for imposition of penalty though\nemanate from proceedings of assessment, it is independent and\nseparate.\n(ii)\nH. Lakshminarayana vs. ITO (2015) 41 ITR 465 order\ndated 03.07.2015. (ITAT, Bengaluru

SHRI ASHOK KUMAR MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

natural justice inasmuch as AO was himself unsure and assessee was not made aware as to which of two limbs of section 271(1)(c) he had to respond—Notice issued by AO u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was untenable as it suffered from vice of non application of mind—Penalty

SHRI RAM DAS MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

natural justice inasmuch as AO was himself unsure and assessee was not made aware as to which of two limbs of section 271(1)(c) he had to respond—Notice issued by AO u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was untenable as it suffered from vice of non application of mind—Penalty

NARAYAN HEIGHTS & TOWERS,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. Therefore, in notice U/s

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.

u/s 271(1)(c) Assessing Officer alleged that assessee had concealed its income, orders imposing penalty were invalid and liable to be cancelled. [In favor of assessee] 8 RAKESH KUMAR JAIN VS DCIT, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR 8 In view of the above facts and judicial decisions, the penalty imposed by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) may kindly

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. SHRI KAMAL SETHIA, JAIPUR

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

penalty in the show cause notice issued u/s 271(1)(c). Further, the assessee has not raised any specific grounds of appeal while filing the appeal in Form No. 35 and thereafter has taken additional ground of appeal during the appellate proceedings. The ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue without giving any opportunity of being heard

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)

natural justice on the ground of absence of opportunity, it has to be established that prejudice is caused to the concerned person by the procedure followed. The issuance of 5 Pooja Upadhyay vs. ITO, Ward 5(1), Jaipur notice is an administrative device for informing the assessee about the proposal to levy penalty in order to enable him to explain

RAJ KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

natural justice are offended. On the basis of such proceedings, no penalty could be imposed on the assessee ; ) taking up of penalty proceedings on one limb and finding the assessee guilty of another limb is bad in law ; penalty proceedings are distinct from the assessment proceedings : though proceedings for imposition of penalty emanate from proceedings of assessment, they are independent

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)

justice. 2.3 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The bench noted that the date of service of the order is not disputed ITA No. 267, 196 & 197/JPR/2024 3 Shri Nath Corporation & Ors., Jaipur. and thereby as such there is not delay and thereby we consider this appeal as having been filed in time

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

natural justice and cannot be sustained. Thus once the proceedings are initiated on one ground, the penalty should also be imposed on the same ground. Where the basis of the initiation of penalty proceedings is not identical with the ground on which the penalty was imposed, the imposition of penalty is not valid. The validity of the order of penalty

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

justice. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The prayer as mentioned above by the assessee for condonation of delay of 6 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the assessee. Thus, the delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

justice. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The prayer as mentioned above by the assessee for condonation of delay of 6 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the assessee. Thus, the delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CIRCLE), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

justice. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The prayer as mentioned above by the assessee for condonation of delay of 6 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the assessee. Thus, the delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned

MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

justice. 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. The prayer as mentioned above by the assessee for condonation of delay of 6 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the assessee. Thus, the delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned