SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment cannot be verified. Subject to these observations Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT the peak credit as worked out by the assessee at Rs. 36,89,310/- is held as undisclosed income for this year. (iii)………… In the above case the assessment for the AY 2001-02 was done however which was quashed by the honourable Tribunal. Even then

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

reassessment cannot be verified. Subject to these observations Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT the peak credit as worked out by the assessee at Rs. 36,89,310/- is held as undisclosed income for this year. (iii)………… In the above case the assessment for the AY 2001-02 was done however which was quashed by the honourable Tribunal. Even then

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

reassessment cannot be verified. Subject to these observations Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT the peak credit as worked out by the assessee at Rs. 36,89,310/- is held as undisclosed income for this year. (iii)………… In the above case the assessment for the AY 2001-02 was done however which was quashed by the honourable Tribunal. Even then

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

reassessment cannot be verified. Subject to these observations Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT the peak credit as worked out by the assessee at Rs. 36,89,310/- is held as undisclosed income for this year. (iii)………… In the above case the assessment for the AY 2001-02 was done however which was quashed by the honourable Tribunal. Even then

SUNIL KUMAR GATTANI,JAIPUR vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, JAIPUR

In the result ground no. 7

business of\nfinance on brokerage basis), wherein he is acting as a partner. Beside this,\nassessee also has interest income under the head income from other sources.\nDuring the year under consideration a search & seizure action was carried u/s\n132 of the Act on 06.09.2018 at the premises of assessee. On the same date,\nsearch was conducted in the case

PREM LATA PANDYA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, , JAIPUR

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

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1471/JPR/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year :2019-20 Prem Lata Pandya बनाम Deputy Commissioner of 302, Raj Mension, D-299, Vs. Income Tax, Tulsi Marg Bani Park, Central Circle-4, Jaipur. Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं./ जीआईआर सं./ PAN/GIR No.:ACXPJ9951A निधर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assessee by : Sh. S.L.Poddar, Adv. राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by: Sh. Gautam Singh

business income is not acceptable. Until the appellant proves with supporting document the unaccounted cash will be remains from unexplained sources and will attract section 115BBE. l) Recently in April 2024, in the case of Uma Maheshwara Rao Chinni Vs Asst CIT ITA No. 895/Coch/2022-Cochin ITAT holds that once the Assessee is unable to substantiate the source of the seized

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

reassessment proceedings u/s 148. 7. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on the record. The assessee HUF filed original return of income on 27/10/2007 declaring total income of Rs. 5,66,74,000/-. The assessment was completed U/s 143(3) of the Act at the returned income on 09/10/2009. Subsequently

R. G. COLONISERS P LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment order passed by the AO whereby the income of Rs. 7,26,439/- was treated as income from other sources instead of business

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI VIMAL CHAND SURANA(HUF), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

reassess the income on account of transaction of purchase of land. However, the said land was purchased by M/s Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd. on 24/08/2006. Thereafter the assessee alongwith Shri Navratan Kothari and Shri Vimal Chand Surana (Individual) purchased the shares of M/s Shri Kalyan Builmart Pvt. Ltd. from Shri Madan Mohan Gupta and his wife Smt. Shashi Kala

PRADEEP KUMAR,JHUJHUNU vs. ITO WARD -2, JHUJHUNU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

business in commodity share market in which he has suffered loss. The assessee has also filed the copy of bank statement. The ld. AO after considering the same has stated that on perusal of the bank statement of the assessee for the year it is found that there is cash deposits of Rs.7,65,000/-. The ld. AO asked

SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

reassess the income of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- in the hands of the assessee being the cash payment in respect of the transaction of purchase of land vide Sale Deed dated 24.08.2006. It is pertinent to note that the assessee company was incorporated on 21.08.2006 and there was no business

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

reassess the income of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- in the hands of the assessee being the cash payment in respect of the transaction of purchase of land vide Sale Deed dated 24.08.2006. It is pertinent to note that the assessee company was incorporated on 21.08.2006 and there was no business

SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

reassess the income of Rs. 5,00,00,000/- in the hands of the assessee being the cash payment in respect of the transaction of purchase of land vide Sale Deed dated 24.08.2006. It is pertinent to note that the assessee company was incorporated on 21.08.2006 and there was no business

SHRI MADHO LAL SAINI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

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

Reassessment pursuant to material found in search can be done through recourse to section 153C only and not by invoking the provisions of section 147/148. 1.12. The provisions of section 153C are over-riding in nature and contain non obstante clause for sections 139,147,148,149,151 and 153. 1.13. Section 147 and 153C are not interchangeable

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

income from business & profession which shows that this issue has already examine during the assessment proceedings and during the course of assessment proceedings the ld. AO was in conscious view that no deemed rental should be taxed on stock in trade. In view of above submission this is to submit that reassessment

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO WARD 4(2)), JAIPUR

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

income from business & profession which shows that this issue has already examine during the assessment proceedings and during the course of assessment proceedings the ld. AO was in conscious view that no deemed rental should be taxed on stock in trade. In view of above submission this is to submit that reassessment

MAHAVEER YADAV,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

business. 11. Briefly stated, the facts of case are that basis receipt of the AIR information, the Assessing Officer observed that there is a cash deposit of Rs. 11,19,000/- in the bank account maintained by the assessee with 10 Shri Mahaveer Yadav, Alwar vs. ITO, Ward-1(5) Alwar the Punjab National Bank and the said income

ADITYA CEMENT,BEHROR vs. ITO, BEHROR

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

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

business income and allow the brought foreword losses from that. The AO has correctly passed the order and given full details at page 11 of the order, therefore it cannot be understand that the same is over looked or mistake has been happen while passing the order. The assesse filed appeal against this order and the same has been partly