RAM DHAN YADAV,CHOMU JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO 7(3), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Natural Justice. " 3. The learned CIT (Appeal) erred in law and on facts in adjudicating the appeal filed against order dated 6th March, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(3), Jaipur u/s 144 r.w.t. 147 of Income Tax Act by way of justifying and retaining the Additions made to the tune

RAM DHAN YADAV,CHOMU JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 7(3), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

Natural Justice. " 3. The learned CIT (Appeal) erred in law and on facts in adjudicating the appeal filed against order dated 6th March, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 7(3), Jaipur u/s 144 r.w.t. 147 of Income Tax Act by way of justifying and retaining the Additions made to the tune

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MUKESH KUMAR SONI, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the cross

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

Natural Justice. The assessee was not provided any opportunity before treating the cash sales as not genuine. However the learned CIT Appeal has deleted the entire additions accepting the plea of the asseseee that the sales effected by the assessee were genuine. In the cross objections the plea of the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) should have quashed

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF), JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

reassessment, if any, for such assessment year has been\nmade.\nThese amendments have been brought into effect retrospectively from 1st June,\n2003.\"\n(emphasis supplied)\nAs per the CBDT Gircular also, in case of section 163C of the Act, assessments\nof the preceding six years as pending on the date on which books of account or\ndocuments or assets seized

YOGESH GINNING MILL, PROP. YOGESH CHAND GUPTA,GOVINDGARH vs. ACIT, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: This Tribunal Which Were Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- 4, Jaipur [ For Short Cit(A) ] Passed On Dates & F For The Assessment Years Mentioned As Tabulated Here In Below, In Turn Those Orders Were Arises Because The Assessee Has Yogesh Ginning Mill Vs. Acit

justice and procedures laid down under the act, passed an order in hurry to complete the assessment on 27.12.2019 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the act. 13. That the assessment order dated 27.12.2019 was passed u/s 153C without issuing any notice u/s 153C as mentioned in the order. 14. That the assessment order dated 27.12.2019 was passed without proposing

YOGESH GINNING MILL, PROP. YOGESH CHAND GUPTA,GOVINDGARH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE I, ALWAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: This Tribunal Which Were Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- 4, Jaipur [ For Short Cit(A) ] Passed On Dates & F For The Assessment Years Mentioned As Tabulated Here In Below, In Turn Those Orders Were Arises Because The Assessee Has Yogesh Ginning Mill Vs. Acit

justice and procedures laid down under the act, passed an order in hurry to complete the assessment on 27.12.2019 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153C of the act. 13. That the assessment order dated 27.12.2019 was passed u/s 153C without issuing any notice u/s 153C as mentioned in the order. 14. That the assessment order dated 27.12.2019 was passed without proposing

KAILASH CHAND YADAV,100, KALU BABA KI DHANI, SHEOSHINGHPUR, AKODA, PHULERA-303338 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, WARD - 1(2), JAIPUR

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

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

reassessment proceedings were unwarranted and notice issued under s. 148 was liable to be quashed. 17 Kailash Chand Yadav vs. ITO (viii) CIT V/s Shree Rajasthan syntax Ltd. (2008) 217 CTR 209 (Raj) S.L.P. Of The Department Dismissed S.L.P. (c) No 8167 Of 2009 Decision All 30/3/09 Reopening of assessment on borrowed satisfaction by Assessing Officer of lesser

SUNIL CHABLANI,AJMER, RAJASTHAN vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

justice, kindly be quashed.\n5.1. Rs. 69,90,000/- The Id. AO erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in\nconsidering the entire sale consideration as the Long Term Capital Gain (LTCG)\nin complete disregard to the other specific binding provisions of law contained u/s\n45 r.w.s. 48 of the Act. The addition

RAGHAV KUMAR DHOOT,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

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

justice must depend on the\ncircumstances of the case, the nature of the inquiry, the rules under\nwhich the tribunal is acting, the subject matter to be dealt with and so\nforth. Can the Courts supplement the statutory procedures with\nrequirements over and above those specified? In order to ensure a fair\nhearing. Courts can insist and require additional steps

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR DUSAD, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that\nrevenue stands dismissed

natural justice.\n4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the learned AO in\nconsidering the sale deeds found during search belonging to firm M/s\nEminent Build Developers in the hands of the assessee. Action in the\nhands of the assessee deserves

PRADEEP KUMAR DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that\nrevenue stands dismissed

natural justice.\n4. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned\nCIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of the learned AO in\nconsidering the sale deeds found during search belonging to firm M/s\nEminent Build Developers in the hands of the assessee. Action in the\nhands of the assessee deserves

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

reassessment proceedings being illegal,\nwithout any basis and contrary to principles of natural justice.\n\n6. In the facts and circumstances

RAM NIWAS YADAV,SHAHPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER BEHROR, BEHROR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

natural justice. Held by the Hon’ble Court: We accordingly remand the proceedings to the ITAT, i.e., respondent no. 1 for de novo hearing of the petitioner’s appeal filed before it. ITAT shall after hearing the parties, pass fresh orders on merits and in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible not later than within six weeks from

AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

natural justice also. That we rely on following judicial pronouncements That Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Rajasthan in the case of MICRO MARBLES (P) LTD. vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER Civil Writ Petn. No. 13719 of 2021 order dated 23.1.2023 Source 7 NYPCTR 94 (Raj) have held that Reassessment

SUSHILA DEVI JANGID,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 7(2), JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 374/JP/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2010-11 Smt. Sushila Devi Jangid 65, Koshaliya Vihar Hajyawala,Muhana Mandi Ke Pass, Sanganer, Jaipur 302 029 बनाम Vs. The ITO Ward 7(2) Jaipur अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AFMPJ 2091 P निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Utkarsh Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by :Shri Gautam Sing

Natural Justice. 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, without prejudice to the above, the assessee had informed its authorized representative about the notice. However, after filing an adjournment, there was no further communication by the authorized representative before CIT(A). Thus, lapse on part of the A/R should not be attributed to the assessee

RSD CONTAINERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Natural Justice Fully Complied With - No Violation Contrary to the assessee's repeated assertions, all statutory notices under Sections 148A, 148, 143(2), and 142(1) were duly issued and responded to. The assessee has mischaracterized the absence of "incriminating documents": The reassessment

KAILASH CHAND MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

naturally go to the seller and not to be broker. The assessee was only a broker and he was entitled only for brokerage. However the contention of the appellant is not verifiable from the material placed on record by the appellant as even the statement which is referred by the appellant has not been placed on record. In the case

MACRO TOWNSHIP PVT LTD,288-289 MAHAVEER NAGAR DURGAPURA JAIPUR vs. DCIT CC -2 JAIPUR , LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

reassess the income of appellant under the provisions of section 153C of the Income Tax Act. The humble appellant submits that a speaking order ensure that the principles of natural justice