MANGI LAL KANDOI ,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

penalty of Rs. 1,85,400/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The assessee craves your indulgence to add amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” Mangi Lal Kandoi vs. ACIT 6. The fact as culled out from the records is that the original return

MANGI LAL KANDOI ,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

penalty of Rs. 1,85,400/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. The assessee craves your indulgence to add amend or alter all or any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” Mangi Lal Kandoi vs. ACIT 6. The fact as culled out from the records is that the original return

MRS. RENU SEHGAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed and that of the

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 837/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Acit Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs. Central Circle-3 27, Onkar Nagar, Civil Lines Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 708 & 709 Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Cuke Mrs. Renu Sehgal The Dcit Vs. 227-278, Nemisagar Colony Central Circle-3, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Varinder Mehta, Cit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 19/08/2019 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm There Are Cross Appeals For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Directed Against The Order Dated 09-04-2013 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur. The 2 Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs Dcit, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

Penalty u/s 271(1)( c) is also initiated for concealment of income of Rs. 5 lakhs as it is a clear case of concealing income. Notice u/s 271(1)( c) is being issued separately for stated default.’’ Thus the ld. CIT(A) has considered the application submitted by the assessee u/s 245(C(1) of the Act as an evidentiary

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCL-1,, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MOHAN SUKHANI, JAIPUR

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is being initiated for concealment of income.” 6. Being aggrieved with the action of the Assessing officer in making the aforesaid additions, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer both on legal

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCL-1,, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MOHAN SUKHANI, JAIPUR

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

Penalty proceedings u/s 271 (1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 is being initiated for concealment of income.” 6. Being aggrieved with the action of the Assessing officer in making the aforesaid additions, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A) wherein the assessee challenged the action of the Assessing Officer both on legal

ROHIT LADIWALA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) is being\ninitiated for concealment of income.\n(Rs. 37,47,000/-)\n7.\nIn the first appeal, the addition so made by the Ld. AO was sustained by\nthe Ld. CIT (A). Hence this appeal.\nGrounds of Appeal No. 1\nLd.AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. LATE SMT. PUSHPA GOYAL, JAIPUR

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

Penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) is being initiated for concealment of income.” 7. It was further submitted by the ld PCIT/DR that ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider the evidences found during the course of search and has deleted the addition on the ground that M/s MBDL Pvt. Ltd has owned up all the data found in cloud

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. LATE SMT. PUSHPA GOYAL, JAIPUR

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

Penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) is being initiated for concealment of income.” 7. It was further submitted by the ld PCIT/DR that ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider the evidences found during the course of search and has deleted the addition on the ground that M/s MBDL Pvt. Ltd has owned up all the data found in cloud

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR vs. LATE SMT. PUSHPA GOYAL, JAIPUR

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

Penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) is being initiated for concealment of income.” 7. It was further submitted by the ld PCIT/DR that ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider the evidences found during the course of search and has deleted the addition on the ground that M/s MBDL Pvt. Ltd has owned up all the data found in cloud