M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated\nhereinabove

73,140 | Nil | Nil\n| CSR expenses | 6,41,42,000 | 6,41,42,000 | 1,41,42,000\n| Deduction u/s 80IA | 15,33,95,189 | Nil | Nil\n| Disallowance u/s 14A | 71,75,575 | 71,75,575 | 71,75,575\n| Service Tax Receivable | 1,93,00,000 | 1,93,00,000 | Set aside\n| Excess provision

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

penalty on you should not be made under section 271(1)© of the Income Tax Act, 1961. If no one attends this office on the said date of hearing, the case shall be decided on the basis of the material available on records. Yours faithfully, 4 ITA NO.309 & 310/JPR/2025 RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE

DWARKA GEMS LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

u/s 271(1)(c) has observed / held as under:\n63. In the light of what is stated above, what emerges is as under:\na)\nb)\nc)\ni)\nj)\nk)\nThe imposition of penalty is not automatic.\nImposition of penalty even if the tax liability is admitted is not automatic.\nEven if the assessee has not challenged the order of assessment

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

section u/s 271(1)(c) of the act under which it is initiated. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. SSA's Emerald Meadows has dismissed the SLP (73 Taxmann.com 248). 5.8 Further, similar view has been adopted by various courts wherein relief has been granted to the appellant in case the penalty

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

section u/s 271(1)(c) of the act under which it is initiated. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. SSA's Emerald Meadows has dismissed the SLP (73 Taxmann.com 248). 5.8 Further, similar view has been adopted by various courts wherein relief has been granted to the appellant in case the penalty

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

section u/s 271(1)(c) of the act under which it is initiated. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT Vs. SSA's Emerald Meadows has dismissed the SLP (73 Taxmann.com 248). 5.8 Further, similar view has been adopted by various courts wherein relief has been granted to the appellant in case the penalty

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal, while allowing the appeal of the assessee has relied on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act, the penalty proceedings had been initiated i.e. whether for concealment of particulars of income or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income. The Tribunal, while allowing the appeal of the assessee has relied on the decision of the Division Bench of this Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Manjunatha Cotton and Ginning

RAMESH CHAND BANSAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, AJMER

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

section 274 – seeking to impose penalty u/s 271 (1)(c) – contents of the notice – requirements of. Assessee is a trust and running a school – income of assessee is exempt u/s 10(23C)(iiiad) – Search was conducted in the group case of assessee – notice issued u/s 153C – returned file in response thereto – assessment completed u/s 153A on the returned loss – assessment

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

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

u/s 274 read with section 271(1)(c) and it was submitted that said notice, ld. AO has not clearly mentioned the limb, on the basis of which, penalty was proposed to be imposed. Ld. AO has simply issued a pre-printed notice without striking off the unnecessary portions of the notice. In support, reliance was placed

RAKESH KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of The Appeal & / Or Modify Any Of The Above Grounds.

u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 of Act which has been issued in printedletter without ticking / marking the applicable clause / without striking-off the irrelevant limb which reveals that the penalty was initiated as well as levied for both the charges. It is apparent that if AO, in the course of assessment proceedings, was satisfied that the assessee has concealed the particulars

SHRI ASHOK KUMAR MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 271(1)(c) he had to respond—Notice issued by AO u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was untenable as it suffered from vice of non application of mind—Penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) liable to be deleted— Assessee’s appeal allowed. (ii) MUNINAGA REDDY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

SHRI RAM DAS MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 271(1)(c) he had to respond—Notice issued by AO u/s 274 r.w.s. 271(1)(c) was untenable as it suffered from vice of non application of mind—Penalty imposed u/s 271(1)(c) liable to be deleted— Assessee’s appeal allowed. (ii) MUNINAGA REDDY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

M/S. RAMBHOJO'S,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

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

section 271(l)(c) do not exist as such he is not liable to pay penalty. The Hon'ble High Court went on to hold that: 'Clause (c) deals with two specific offences, that is to say, concealing particulars of income or furnishing inaccurate particulars of income.... But drawing up penalty proceedings for one offence and finding the assessee guilty

SMT. APARNA AGRAWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue

73,80,031/- levied by the AO @ 30% of the undisclosed income under clause 1(c) of section 271AAB of the Income Tax Act to Rs. 91,26,677/- under clause 1(a) of that section Smt. Aparna Agarwal, Kota. despite the fact that manner of earning of undisclosed income was not disclosed by the assessee. 2. Before

SHRI RAJENDRA AGRAWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue

73 of paper book Copy of Assessment Order dated 22.12.2017 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota (Raj.) for the Assessment Year 2013-14 (page nos. 74-80 of paper book) • Copy of ledger A/c of following shares brokers from the books of account of assessee depicting the details of equity shares

SHRI VASUDEV AGRAWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the revenue

73 of paper book Copy of Assessment Order dated 22.12.2017 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota (Raj.) for the Assessment Year 2013-14 (page nos. 108-114 of paper book) (B) IN RELATION TO SHARES SALES: Summary of shares sale during the year under consideration (page no. 115 of paper book

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

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA nos

73 of paper book. Copy of relevant page of bank statement showing the payment made against purchases of shares (page no. 74 of paper book) Copy of Corporate Action of the Company informed to Bombay Stock Exchange (Effect of Stock Split)(page no. 75 of paper book) Acknowledgement of ITR filed on 16.10.2013 u/s 139(1) of Income T4ax