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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment\nproceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty\nproceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has\ncontroverted the provision of relevant section.\n9.\nMotive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought in statue\nwere not proved.\n3.2\nThe

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings;\n7 The assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate\nproceedings:\n8. & 9) That the alleged loans were treated as income of the assessee and the\nsame cannot be considered as a loan for the purpose of levy of penalty; and that\nwithout any credible evidences the caption amounts should be alleged

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings;\n7 The assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate\nproceedings:\n8. & 9) That the alleged loans were treated as income of the assessee and the\nsame cannot be considered as a loan for the purpose of levy of penalty; and that\nwithout any credible evidences the caption amounts should be alleged

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment\nproceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty\nproceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has\ncontroverted the provision of relevant section.\n9.\nMotive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought in statue\nwere not proved.\n3.2\nThe

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)

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty proceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has controverted the provision of relevant section. 24 M/s Gokul Kripa Colonisers & Developers Pvt. Ltd. 9. Motive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings;\n7 The assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate\nproceedings:\n8. & 9) That the alleged loans were treated as income of the assessee and the\nsame cannot be considered as a loan for the purpose of levy of penalty; and that\nwithout any credible evidences the caption amounts should be alleged

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)

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment proceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty proceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has controverted the provision of relevant section. 24 M/s Gokul Kripa Colonisers & Developers Pvt. Ltd. 9. Motive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment\nproceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty\nproceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has\ncontroverted the provision of relevant section.\n9\nMotive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought in statue\nwere not proved.\n3.2\nThe

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment\nproceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty\nproceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has\ncontroverted the provision of relevant section.\n9.\nMotive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought in statue\nwere not proved.\n3.2\nThe

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment\nproceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty\nproceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has\ncontroverted the provision of relevant section.\n9.\nMotive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought in statue\nwere not proved.\n3.2\nThe

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

132(4) not available for penalty proceedings. The assessment\nproceedings and penalty proceedings are two separate proceedings. and in penalty\nproceedings relying on such finding it cannot be opined that the assessee has\ncontroverted the provision of relevant section.\n9\nMotive for which provisions of section 269SS and 269T were brought in statue\nwere not proved.\n3.2\nThe

RUPESH TAMBI,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

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

penalty of Rs.22,21,149/- under sub section 1(c) of section 271\nAAB of the IT Act, 1961 @30% in above said additional income.\n3.\nThat the appellant craves permission to add to or amend to any of\ngrounds of appeal or to withdraw any of them.\n3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

271(1)(c)\nof the IT Act, 1961 and consequent penalty of Rs 404481 imposed by him is\nwrong and bad in law.\n2.\nThat without prejudice to the ground No. (1) above on the facts and in the\ncircumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) is wrong, unjust and has erred in\nlaw in confirming penalty of Rs.4

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

271(1)(c)\nof the IT Act, 1961 and consequent penalty of Rs 404481 imposed by him is\nwrong and bad in law.\n2.\nThat without prejudice to the ground No. (1) above on the facts and in the\ncircumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) is wrong, unjust and has erred in\nlaw in confirming penalty of Rs.4

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

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

132 of the Act and survey action u/s 133A of the Act was\ncarried out by the Income Tax Department on the members of Chandra\nPrakash Agarwal Group on 28.07.2016 to which the assessee is one of the\nmembers. Because of that action notices were issued to the above named\nassessee u/s 153A of the Act. In response to notice

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: -

section 271(1)(c) held that assessee has concealed particulars of its true income to the extent of Rs. 6,19,338/- and so liable for penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) of the L. T. Act, 1961 and vide impugned penalty order levied penalty of Rs. 1,91,375/- u/s 271 (1) (c) of the I.T. Act. The present appeal