HARISH JAIN,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

HARISH JAIN,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

HARISH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

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

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

271(1)(c) of the IT Act for the AY 2012-13 to 2016-17 and notice u/s 270A of the Act for the AY 2017- 18 & notice u/s 271AAB(IA) of the Act for the AY 2018-19 were issued to the assessee 29.06.2022 fixing the case for hearing on 14.07.2022 & served upon his registered email (harish@resonance.ac.in) through ITBA

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. SHAKUNTLAM COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

u/s 271(1)(c).\n3.\nIt is submitted that as per explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) amount\nadded by the AO is deemed to represent the income in respect of which\nparticulars have been concealed provided that assessee fails to offer any\nexplanation or offers an explanation which is found to be false or offers an\nexplanation which

SHRI OM PRAKASH MODI,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 196/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2014-15 Shri Om Prakash Modi, Cuke D.C.I.T., Vs. B-49, Keshav Path, Suraj Nagar Central Circle-2, (West), Civil Lines, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Acfpm 8683 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Manish Agarwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Varinder Mehta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 04/03/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/03/2021 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)-4, Jaipur Dated 01/01/2018 For The A.Y. 2014-15, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Confirming The Penalty U/S 271Aab Imposed At Rs. 3,75,00,000/-, Arbitrarily, Thus The Order So Passed Deserves To Be Quashed. 2. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case The Ld. Cit(A)Has Erred In Ignoring The Fact That The Appellant Has Duly Disclosed In The Statements U/S 132(4) & The Mode & Manner Was Also Explained, Further Due Tax Was Also Paid, Therefore, The Penalty Of Rs. 3,75,00,000/- So Levied Deserves To Be Deleted. 2.1 That The Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Confirming The Penalty Imposed On Additional Income Of Rs. 12,50,00,000/- Duly Offered

271 AAB of the Act and penalty levied thereon is liable to be set aside.” 18. It has been contended by the ld AR that the AO completed the assessment by accepting the income declared by the assessee including the income of Rs. 12,50,00,000/- and penalty proceeding u/s 271AAB were initiated. While levying the penalty

MAHESH KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE 7 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

234 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Prepare ITNS-150 which enclosed with this order. Issue penalty notice u/s 271(1)(c) r.w.s. 274 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for concealing particulars of income and furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. 6. Being aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Before

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRASHANT GUPTA 301, ANUKAMPA MANSION-I, M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR, M.I. ROAD, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

234/-. In penalty proceedings, the assessee filed explanation. However, the A.O. rejected the same and levied the penalty of Rs. 62,70,000/- U/s 271AAB(1)(a) of the Act. 4. By the impugned order, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the penalty after observing as under: “5. I have considered the facts of the case, gone through the assessment order

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