ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

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

reassessment, if any, relating to\nany assessment year falling within the period of six assessment years referred to\nin this sub-section pending on the date of initiation of the search under Section\n132 or making of requisition under Section 132A, as the case may be, shall\nabate.\" What is clear from this is that Section 153A

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.

1)(c). However, so far as the penalty levied by the AO in respect of the additions made to the total income of the assessee, this Tribunal in the quantum appeal vide order dated 30th July, 2018 has either deleted the said addition made by the AO or set aside the same to the record of the AO. The relevant

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.

1)(c). However, so far as the penalty levied by the AO in respect of the additions made to the total income of the assessee, this Tribunal in the quantum appeal vide order dated 30th July, 2018 has either deleted the said addition made by the AO or set aside the same to the record of the AO. The relevant

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.

1)(c). However, so far as the penalty levied by the AO in respect of the additions made to the total income of the assessee, this Tribunal in the quantum appeal vide order dated 30th July, 2018 has either deleted the said addition made by the AO or set aside the same to the record of the AO. The relevant

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 (1), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under the said clause (c).' 13

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 (1), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under the said clause (c).' 13

RAMESH CHAND BANSAL,BEAWAR vs. DCIT, AJMER

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

reassessment was completed wherein, addition on account of bogus purchase was made – addition not challenged by assessee in order to buy peace of mind and to avoid protracted litigation – AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) vide the assessment order itself – at the end of the Assessment order, Ld. AO mentioned “penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) are being

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMPTIONS,CIRCLE,JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

c)Income-tax Act by giving interest free advances to persons covered u/s 13(3) Income-tax Act". h. "Whether Id. CIT(A) is justified in holding entire reassessment is considered void and illegal without considering the merits of fact that benefit of the section 11/12 was denied, due to violation of section 13(1

RAJ KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

13,65,623/-, there was no evidence to prove that entries recorded in documents found during course of search was over and above income declared by Assessee as undisclosed income—Assessee's Appeal allowed—Cross-appeal by revenue dismissed. (iii) It is submitted that the case of the assessee is fully covered by the Decision of the Hon'ble Bench

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.

13 The impugned land was about more than 15 kms from the municipal limits as existed on the date of notification. The assessee under a bonafide impression that the agricultural land is not exigible to capital gains tax, did not disclose the profits arising on its sale. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS which was finalized

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

c)(ii) r.w.s.13(2)(g) of the I.T. Act,1961. 2. On the facts and circumstance of the case and in law the Ld.CIT (Appeals) has erred in ignoring the facts that AO had denied exemption u/s 11 for the year under consideration as no clause of irrevocability mentioned in trust deed and also funds transferred by the trustee

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

reassessment is to be done in two different stages challenging the reasons of reopening and (i) challenging the assessment order. Assessee's challenge to the order of the assessing officer rejecting the objection against the reasons of reopening and assessce's challenge to the assessment order are two separate proceedings. Assessee cannot challenge order of the assessing officer disposing objections

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

C-Deductions in respect of certain incomes.\"\r\nno such deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of this\r\nincome for such assessment year on or before the due date specified under\r\nsub-section (1) of Section 139.]\"\r\nOn a perusal of the aforesaid statutory provision, it transpires that sub-section

NARAYAN HEIGHTS & TOWERS,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Hearing Of Appeal.”

13 of CIT(A)’s order, ld CIT(A) mentioned that:- “Therefore, in view of the above discussion, it is held that the appellant firm has furnished inaccurate particulars of income by adopting a unique method wherein sale consideration/compensation was not declared anywhere in its return of income….” Thus the penalty proceedings were initiated without specifying the limb for reasons

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

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA No

13 ITA Nos. 1384(4)/JP/2018 Smt. Indira Agrawal, Kota. 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 no. 93-99 of paper book). (B) IN RELATION TO SHARES SALES: Summary of shares sale during the year under consideration

SHRI AJAY AGARWAL,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

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

reassessment cannot be declared invalid in the penalty proceedings’’. View taken by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the above judgment was indirectly affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, when it dismissed an SLP filed by the Revenue against the judgment in the case of SSA’s Emerald Meadows (supra), specifically observing that there was no merits

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

reassessment cannot be declared invalid in the penalty proceedings’’. View taken by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the above judgment was indirectly affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court, when it dismissed an SLP filed by the Revenue against the judgment in the case of SSA’s Emerald Meadows (supra), specifically observing that there was no merits

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

reassess taking into consideration the other material in respect of completed\nassessments/unabated assessments. Meaning thereby, in respect of\ncompleted/unabated assessments, no addition can be made by the AO in absence of any\nincriminating material found during the course of search under section 132 or requisition\nunder section 132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments\ncan be re-opened