ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SUNITA AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. ASHA JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SANGEETA MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKESH JAIN, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

ACIT,CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI RAMESH KUMAR MANTRI, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

ACIT, CC-4, JAIPUR vs. SHRI MUKUT BEHARI AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result appeals of the revenue are dismissed and the cross

section 132 (1) of the Income Tax Act was carried out by the Income Tax Department on the persons/ members of the Maverick group, Jaipur on 22nd July 2015. In this group, in some cases department as well is assessee’s are in appeal against the order of CIT (A). The main grounds of appeals have been briefly mentioned

BARODA RAJASTHAN KHESTRIYA GRAMIN BANK,AJMER vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

482/-. Revenue holds that as per information available on record, the assessee has wrongly claimed expenses of Rs. 1,37,05,000/- for the Advance written off and also claimed expenses of Rs. 3,39,25,000/- on account of provision for standard assets during the F.Y. 2016-17 relevant to AY 2017-18. Based on that contention a notice

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LTD ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) JAIPUR , JAIPUR

reassessment shall be passed by an Assessing\nOfficer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year\nreferred to in clause (b) of [sub-section (1) of] section 153A or the assessment\nyear referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B, except with the\nprior approval of the Joint Commissioner:]\n18.1

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL JAIPUR , JAIPUR

reassessment shall be passed by an Assessing Officer below the rank of Joint Commissioner in respect of each assessment year referred to in clause (b) of [sub-section (1) of] section 153A or the assessment year referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of section 153B, except with the prior approval of the Joint Commissioner:]\n18.1

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER vs. BARODA RAJASTHAN KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the C

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalassistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2, Ajmer, C. R. Building – 305 001. ..... Appellant Vs.

482/- against the returned income of Rs. 168, 98, 64,432/- u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act. The assessee being aggrieved with this order (disallowance of Rs. 2, 17, 69,052/- u/s. 43B of the Act) of the AO preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), fate is not known to us as there is no information

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. NISHA JAIN, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

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

section 133A (6) empowered the Income Tax Authority to record the statement on oath, therefore the recording of statement u/s 131 in this case was not ultra-vires. 6 Whether facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) is justified in not appreciating the in other important fact that during the assessment proceedings of the assessee

RASHLEELA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

482,500\n64\niii. Other Companies\nRMC Med Ltd.\n5,719,000\n2,907,000\n2,812,000\n64\nQuoated & Trade\nITC Limited\n211,749\n211,749\n64\nJP Infratech Ltd.\n1,020,000\n1,020,000\n64\nShare of Punjab Alkalies & Chemical Ltd.\n6,333,021\n6,333,021\n64\nB. Investments in Partnership firms\nMahabali Associates