R P WOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AJMER vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

250 of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2019-20. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. The orders passed by the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidences, facts and circumstances of the case and are therefore liable to be quashed

GHANSHYAM TAK,NAYA GHAR AJMER vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

250 of the IT Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2020-21. The assessee has raised the following grounds :- 1. The orders passed by the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidences, facts and circumstances of the case and are therefore liable to be quashed

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

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

250(Madras) for the proposition that this issue can never be a question of law in the assessee’s case as it is purely a question of fact. It was further submitted that as per section 271(1)(c), the penalty may be imposed for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income or for concealment of income and an opportunity of being

SHRI VIMAL CHAND SURANA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

271 shall be imposed upon the assessee in respect of the undisclosed income referred to in sub-section (1). Section 158BFA(2): (2) The Assessing Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) in the course of any proceedings under this Chapter, may direct that a person shall pay by way of penalty a sum which shall not be less than the amount

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

250 has held that a person who is accused of the conditions mentioned in section 271 should be made known about the grounds on which they intend imposing penalty on him as section 274 makes it clear that assessee has a right to contest such proceedings and should have full opportunity to meet the case of the Department and show

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

250 has held that a person who is accused of the conditions mentioned in section 271 should be made known about the grounds on which they intend imposing penalty on him as section 274 makes it clear that assessee has a right to contest such proceedings and should have full opportunity to meet the case of the Department and show

SMT. SHIPRA JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty so levied u/s 271(1)(c) is hereby deleted and appeals are allowed

250 has held that a person who is accused of the conditions mentioned in section 271 should be made known about the grounds on which they intend imposing penalty on him as section 274 makes it clear that assessee has a right to contest such proceedings and should have full opportunity to meet the case of the Department and show

SHRI VIVEK SETHIA,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

250 gram for unmarried woman and 100 grams of per made of member of family is required be given while treating the unexplained jewellery found at the time of search and seizure action. Further, the valuation has been done by the departmental valuer at the current prevailing rate without considering the actual cost of acquisition at the relevant point

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

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

250 gram for unmarried woman and 100 grams of per made of member of family is required be given while treating the unexplained jewellery found at the time of search and seizure action. Further, the valuation has been done by the departmental valuer at the current prevailing rate without considering the actual cost of acquisition at the relevant point

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)

250/- 13 1178/JP/2025 2021-22 19.06.2025 Levy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act vide order dated 28.08.2023 for an amount of Rs. 6,99,87,788/- Against all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred cross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to CO/46/JP/2025. 2. As agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered

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)

250/- 13 1178/JP/2025 2021-22 19.06.2025 Levy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act vide order dated 28.08.2023 for an amount of Rs. 6,99,87,788/- Against all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred cross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to CO/46/JP/2025. 2. As agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered

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

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

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

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

section for levy of penalty. In the absence of this the assessee was precluded in submitting a cogent reply. The Karnataka High Court in the case of Manjunatha Cotton & Ginning Factory 259 ITR 565 has held penalty not leviable in similar circumstances. In view of this it is submitted that this being a legal lacuna, penalty levied may kindly

VISION JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

250/-, Further, the Ld. CIT(A) also sustained the addition of Rs. 4,42,953/- (25% of Rs. 17,57,750/-) In view of totality of the facts and keeping in view the provisions of section 271(1)(c), the assessee is found guilty of furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income to the extent of amount of Rs. 4

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SMT. JYOTI AGARWAL, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was right in cancelling the penalty by placing reliance on the decision of the Jaipur Bench of the Hon’ble ITAT in ITA No. 296/JP/2014 in Ajay traders Vs DCIT Central Circle, Alwar

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

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross objections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA

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

250/-\n13\n1178/JP/2025\n2021-22\n19.06.2025\nLevy of penalty u/s 271E of the Act\nvide order dated 28.08.2023 for an\namount of Rs.6,99,87,788/-\nAgainst all these appeals of the revenue the assessee preferred\ncross\nobjections which were numbered as CO/39/JP/2025 to\nCO/46/JP/2025.\n2.\nAs agreed by the parties the lead case of revenue is considered in\nITA