ANKIT JAIN,TONK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TONK

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

234/- on account of payment of\nLIC policy as unexplained expenses u/s 69C of the Act and making\naddition of such amount to the total income of the appellant, ignoring the\nexplanation offered in this regard during the course of assessment\nproceedings and also without appreciating the facts of the case that it is a\ncase of no-accounts. Thus

ANKIT JAIN,TONK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TONK

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

234/- on account of payment of\nLIC policy as unexplained expenses u/s 69C of the Act and making\naddition of such amount to the total income of the appellant, ignoring the\nexplanation offered in this regard during the course of assessment\nproceedings and also without appreciating the facts of the case that it is a\ncase of no-accounts. Thus

ANSHUL JAIN,TONK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TONK

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

234/- on account of payment of\nLIC policy as unexplained expenses u/s 69C of the Act and making\naddition of such amount to the total income of the appellant, ignoring the\nexplanation offered in this regard during the course of assessment\nproceedings and also without appreciating the facts of the case that it is a\ncase of no-accounts. Thus

GCK STOCK PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed\nOrder pronounced in the open court on 06/05/2025

u/s 234 and initiating penalty under section 271[1][c]\n4) In the facts and the circumstances of law, the Ld. Commissioner

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRLCE-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S CUROSIS HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED , JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

234 dated 05.12.2012, the assessee purchased Gold Ornaments amounting to Rs. 5,003084/-weighted quantity 162.63 Gins. vi. Vide Invoice No. 269 dated 15.01.2013, the assessee purchased Gold Ornaments amounting to Rs. 4,99.7127-weighted quantity 164.10 Gms. DCIT vs. Curosis Healthcare Private Limited The assessee purchased jewellery from M/s Nagpal Jewellers, the details of such bills are hereunder

SHRI RAI SINGH SIHAG,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-1, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 441/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Cuke I.T.O. Vs. B-105, Vaishali Nagar, Ward- 3(1), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Bgvps 4485 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta & Shri S.L. Jain (Advs.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By :Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13/07/2017 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. The Reasons For Reopening Of The Assessment Not Valid :- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Ao Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Invoking Action U/S 147.The Notice For Reassessment Is So Hastily Issued Without Examining The Correct Factual & Legal Position. The Action For Reassessment Is Often Made Without Application Of Mind Fairly & Objectively The Ao. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 Itr 437 (Sc)

234(C). That the appellant reserves his right to add, amend or alter the ground of appeal on or before the date of appeal hearing.” 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 4 ITA 441/JP/2019_ Shri Rai Singh Sihag Vs ITO 3. The brief facts

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

234\nTaxman 771(SC) the Hon’ble Supreme Court has dismissed the SLP\nagainst High Court's order, wherein it was held that since assessee himself\nhad stated in sworn statement during search and seizure about his\nundisclosed income tax was to be levied on basis of admission without\nscrutinizing documents. The ld. AO also noted that the statement made

RAJASTHAN STATE FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

234(A.Y.s 2012-13, 2013-14 &2017-18)/JPR/2024 M/s. Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., 501, 5th Floor Kisan Bhawan, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Jaipur 302 015 PAN No. AAFCR 1250F ...... Appellant Vs. DCIT, Circle-06, Jaipur …... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv., Ld. AR Respondent by : Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT, Ld. DR Date of hearing

RAJASTHAN STATE FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT-CERCLE 6, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

234(A.Y.s 2012-13, 2013-14 &2017-18)/JPR/2024 M/s. Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., 501, 5th Floor Kisan Bhawan, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Jaipur 302 015 PAN No. AAFCR 1250F ...... Appellant Vs. DCIT, Circle-06, Jaipur …... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv., Ld. AR Respondent by : Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT, Ld. DR Date of hearing

RAJASHTHAN STATE FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

234(A.Y.s 2012-13, 2013-14 &2017-18)/JPR/2024 M/s. Rajasthan State Food and Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd., 501, 5th Floor Kisan Bhawan, Lal Kothi Tonk Road, Jaipur 302 015 PAN No. AAFCR 1250F ...... Appellant Vs. DCIT, Circle-06, Jaipur …... Respondent Appellant by : Mr. Rohan Chatter, Adv., Ld. AR Respondent by : Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT, Ld. DR Date of hearing

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. PR.CIT, , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 04/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Cement Limited, Cuke Pr.Cit, Vs. Bangur Nagar, Post Box No. 33, Udaipur. Beawar. Pan No.: Aaccs 8796 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Dilip Desai (Ca) Shri Vijay Shah (Ca) Shri Mohit Choudhary (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pcit, Udaipur Dated 03.02.2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – Udaipur, (Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Pr. Cit) Was Not Justified In Initiating Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Since The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue.

271(1)(c). The appellant’s appeal before Ld. CIT (Appeals) against above order u/s 143(3) of the A.O. is pending as on date for disposal. 1.3 Post the above, Ld. CIT issued notice u/s 263 of the Act on 11-10-2018 to revise the above order of the A.O. Copy of the notices dated

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

234 (Kerala)/[2016] 240 Taxman 168 (Kerala)/[2016] 385 ITR 624\n(Kerala)/[2016] 287 CTR 187 (Kerala) [22-03-2016]\n\"18. On going through Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, what we find is that if\nthe authority specified therein has reason to believe that any person to whom a\nsummons under sub-section (1) of section

BINA KANWAR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD TONK, TONK

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

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

u/s 234 A.B.C. The appellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest, so charged, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, may kindly be deleted in full.’’ 2.1 Apropos grounds of appeal of the assessee, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee by passing

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

234 (Kerala)/[2016] 240 Taxman 168 (Kerala)/[2016] 385 ITR 624 (Kerala)/[2016] 287 CTR 187 (Kerala) [22-03-2016] "18. On going through Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, what we find is that if the authority specified therein has reason to believe that any person to whom a summons under sub-section (1) of section

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JAIPUR

271(1)(c) of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961.\n\n9. That the appellant craves the right to add, delete, amend or abandon any\nof the grounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal.\n\n5. Succinctly, the facts as culled out from the records are thatsearch\nand seizure operations under section

SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEEMUCH vs. THE PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

234 ITR 83 ] held that she do not intend to disturber the assessment that has already been made but only passing an order where applicability of the provisions of Section 69C is considered and unexplained cash purchases is made appropriately. The order of the ld. AO, was therefore, made liable to revision under the explanation (2) clause (a) of section

SUNIL KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, \nvk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos.513 & 519 to 521/JP/2025\nfu/k Zkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2018-19 to 2020-21\n\nSunil Kumar Agarwal\n395, Narnoli Mansion, Outside\nSanganeri Gate, Jaipur\ncuke\nVs.\nACIT,\nCentral Circle-2,\nJaipur\nLFkk;h y s[kk l a-@thvkb Zvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABRPA9601M\nvihykFkhZ@Appellant i zR;Fkh Z@Respondent\n\nvk;dj vihy la-@ITSS No. 03/JP/2025\nfu/k Zkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Year : 2015-16\

271 as under:-\n\"In estimating any escaped turnover, it is inevitable that there is some guesswork.\nThe assessing authority while making the best judgment assessment, no doubt,\nshould arrive at his conclusion without any bias and on a rational basis. That\nauthority should not be vindictive or capricious. If the estimate made by the\n\n22\nITA Nos.513

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 68 of the Act are not satisfied. However the appellant / Id. AR has submitted ledger account of Kotak Bank loan and made arguments regarding Kotak Bank Loan and contended that bank loan cannot be treated as unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition