ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA , JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION, JAIPUR

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

94,67,426/- resulting in surrendered of the same in the ITR. Hence, the above mentioned concealment of income leads to attract penal provisions by virtue of section 271 (1) (c). Further. the explanation put forth by the assessee in his defence has not been found satisfactory and in this way also the case of the assessee falls

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

7)\nSLP dismissed against order of High Court that where AO had triggered penalty proceedings\nu/s 271(1)(c) against assessee, it was necessary for him to indicate broadly as to limb under\nwhich penalty proceedings were triggered.\n\nCIT Vs. SSA'S Emerald Meadows (2016) 242 Taxman 180 (SC)(Case laws compilation\nindex PB 8)\nWhere Tribunal relying

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)

7) SLP dismissed against order of High Court that where AO had triggered penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) against assessee, it was necessary for him to indicate broadly as to limb under which penalty proceedings were triggered. CIT Vs. SSA’S Emerald Meadows (2016) 242 Taxman 180 (SC)(Case laws compilation index PB 8) Where Tribunal relying on decision

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.

94,390 26,84,725 + 29,75,859 2011-12 3,20,29,420 82,59,551 69,54,913 2012-13 3,00,06,860 On further appeal in the quantum proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) partly deleted the additions made by the AO and consequently the matter was carried to this Tribunal in cross appeals by the revenue

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.

94,390 26,84,725 + 29,75,859 2011-12 3,20,29,420 82,59,551 69,54,913 2012-13 3,00,06,860 On further appeal in the quantum proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) partly deleted the additions made by the AO and consequently the matter was carried to this Tribunal in cross appeals by the revenue

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.

94,390 26,84,725 + 29,75,859 2011-12 3,20,29,420 82,59,551 69,54,913 2012-13 3,00,06,860 On further appeal in the quantum proceedings, the ld. CIT (A) partly deleted the additions made by the AO and consequently the matter was carried to this Tribunal in cross appeals by the revenue

RAMESH CHAND BANSAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, AJMER

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

94,500/- in the return in response to notice u/s 153A. Hence, the pleading on the ground of equity also fails. 5.7 Thus though surrender was during the search in course of statements u/s 132(4), the disclosure u/s 132(4), by itself cannot redeem the appellant from deeming provisions of the explanation 5A to section 271

R P WOOD PRODUCTS PVT LTD ,NAYA BAZAR AJMER vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 271AAB is not satisfied. Apart from the fact that these transactions were duly recorded in the books of account, the assessee has also produced relevant documents, the details of which are as under :— (A) IN RELATION TO SHARES PURCHASE : Summary of shares purchased during the FY 2012-13 (page No. 87 of paper book) Copy of share allotment Advice

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

94 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. 95-101 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

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

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

271(l)(c) when: 'the initiation of the penalty proceeding was for concealment of the particulars of income. But the Tribunal finally held that the assessee would be deemed to have concealed the particulars of income or to have furnished inaccurate particulars of such income.' 19. Thus it is evident that when the AO is satisfied at the stage

SHRI ANIL GHATIWALA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

94,800/- seized cash of Rs.8,00,000/- as undisclosed cash and accepted the remaining cash of Rs.94000/- as genuine (Rs.94000/- was cash balance of his wife’s proprietorship business.) It was submitted that the said cash found was not a undisclosed income rather it is his accumulated savings over the period out of withdrawals made

RAM KISHORE MEENA, ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2,, KOTA vs. MANGALAM CEMENT LTD, MORAK, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

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

94,26,39,610/- which was assessed at Rs. 103,64,96,763/- by making addition of Rs.9,41,02,253/-. In respect of all the additions made by the AO except on disallowance made out of certain expenses, penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) was initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income. After the order of CIT(A)/ ITAT

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

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

94,42,193/- comprising of Rs. 4,82,24,630/- on account of unaccounted expenditure on various projects, Rs. 62,17,563/- on account of jewelry, Rs. 2,17,563/- on account of silver items and Rs. 50 lacs for any other irregularity or discrepancy. We will be deal each of the three items of surrender

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

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

94,42,193/- comprising of Rs. 5,17,32,630/- on account of unaccounted expenditure on various projects, Rs. 62,17,563/- on account of jewelry, Rs. 2,17,563/- on account of silver items and Rs. 50 lacs for any other irregularity or discrepancy. We will be deal each of the three items of surrender

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

94,250/- and claimed exempt it U/s 10(38) of the Act. Apart from the dividend income on equity shares, which was also claimed exempted. Thereafter a search and seizure action U/s 132 of the Act was carried out in the case of M/s Kota Dall Mill Group to whom the assessee belongs on 02/07/2015. During the course of search

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

7 DCIT Vs Indira Agarwal doubted or controverted by the Assessing Officer in the course of assessment proceedings. During the course of search and seizure operation, no incriminating material, evidence or documents whatsoever was found, calculation of long term capital gain cannot be said to be incriminating material when all these documents are duly recorded in the books of account

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

94-98 of paper book) " Copy of Balance sheet & Capital Account of AY 2011-12. (Page No. 99-100 of paper book) " Copy of Assessment Order dated 07.12.2017 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153A passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle Kota (Raj.) for the Assessment Year 2011-12. (Page No. 101-103 of paper book) (B) IN RELATION

M/S SHIV KUMAR SUSHIL KUMAR TEA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

94 (AP) that penalty proceedings are entirely distinct from assessment proceedings. 4. The ld AR has further contended that since all material and facts relevant to the computation of total income were duly furnished by assessee and no deficiencies in furnishing of such facts were pointed out by the department, deeming fiction of Explanation 1 to section 271