PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

business and\n33\nITA No. 598/JP/2024\nPinkcity Jewelhouse Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT\nprofession' and as stated above, the benefit of set off of losses both current and\nbrought forward was allowable to the assessee in accordance with law.\nThe contention of the Revenue therefore that the income be treated as deemed income\nu/s 69,69A/B/C of the Act is accordingly

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: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

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

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

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

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

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

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

reassessment cannot be verified. Subject to these observations\n\n24\nITA Nos.56 to 61/JP/2025\nShri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT\n\nthe peak credit as worked out by the assessee at Rs.36,89,310/- is held as\nundisclosed income for this year.\n\n(iii)…………\n\nIn the above case the assessment for the AY 2001-02 was done however which

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 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

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

MO. SHARIPH KURESHI,SIKAR vs. ITO WARD-4 SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

business and if that was taken into account, the income was likely to increase by the same. However, while passing the order under section 143(3), read with section 147 of the Act, the ground on which the assessment was reopened had been dropped i.e., not confirmed and certain other income was added. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld

SHRI SALASAR BALAJI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassessment proceedings u/s.148 of the Income Tax\nAct, 1961 against the assessee appellant.\n\n2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Assessing\nOfficer grossly erred in not providing the relevant material & evidence and statement\nrecorded u/s.132 of the Act of Shri Mukesh Banka during the course of search\nproceeding

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

business activities and only getting interest\nincome under the head other income' for providing bogus share application\nto different beneficiaries. The admission of Shri Mukesh Banka vide his\nstatement recorded u/s 131/132(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on\n30.05.2018 and 19.07.2018 that these companies are paper/shell\ncompanies, controlled and managed by Shri Mukesh Banka. The directors\nof these

BHASKAR CHOUHAN,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SIKAR

business receipts and there would be no error of\nlaw in regarding unexplained deposits as income of the\nassessee from other sources. Unless there are strong reasons\nfor connecting unexplained deposits with known source of\nincome of the assessee, there will be no alternative to treating\nthem as income from other sources, Hence these deposits are\nto be considered

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

business receipts and there would be no error of law in regarding unexplained deposits as income of the assessee from other sources. Unless there are strong reasons for connecting unexplained deposits with known source of income of the assessee, there will be no alternative to treating them as income from other sources, Hence these deposits are to be considered