GEETA DEVI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WD 1(4), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 450/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Badri Lal Agarwal through Legal heir Smt. Geeta Devi G-5, Shyama Residency, Plot No. 7, Purander Ji Ka Bag Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ALGPA5194C अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. S. B. Natani, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख /

68 in the hands of assessee also and the same was confirmed by CIT(A) and Tribunal—Not justified—Apparently, there was a violation of principles of natural justice as the statement of one of the important witnesses, namely, R on which heavy reliance was placed by the AO is neither referred to in the assessment order nor copy thereof

SURENDRA PAL SINGH SAHNI,KOTA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

68 in the hands of assessee also and the same was confirmed by CIT(A) and Tribunal—Not justified—Apparently, there was a violation of principles of natural justice as the statement of one of the important witnesses, namely, R on which heavy reliance was placed by the AO is neither referred to in the assessment order nor copy thereof

SANJAY LUNIA,AJMER vs. ITO WD-2(1), AJMER

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

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

natural justice, one more opportunity was given to the assessee to submit the information as required vide this office notice dated 29.05.2019 vide notice u/s 142(1) of Income tax Act, 1961 fixing the case for hearing on 12.07.2019 but the assessee failed to comply with the said notice also. Therefore, again further opportunity was given to the assessee vide

RAJIV NIGOTIYA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

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

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

nature justice. The assessment order is silent on the invocation of provision of section 115BBE qua the provision of section 68

SANDEEP SETHI ,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

nature justice. The assessment order is silent on the invocation of provision of section 115BBE qua the provision of section 68

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABU LAL DATA, 2015-16

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

nature of agricultural income, exemption u/s. 10(1) was rightly denied and same was treated as income from the other sources.” 33. On going through the bunch of evidence where in the holding of land is as much as 230 vighas are in possession and the assessee has placed on records the accounts of the agricultural income, corroborated this income

SHRI BABU LAL DATA,ALWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

nature of agricultural income, exemption u/s. 10(1) was rightly denied and same was treated as income from the other sources.” 33. On going through the bunch of evidence where in the holding of land is as much as 230 vighas are in possession and the assessee has placed on records the accounts of the agricultural income, corroborated this income

SHRI BABU LAL DATA,ALWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

nature of agricultural income, exemption u/s. 10(1) was rightly denied and same was treated as income from the other sources.” 33. On going through the bunch of evidence where in the holding of land is as much as 230 vighas are in possession and the assessee has placed on records the accounts of the agricultural income, corroborated this income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABU LAL DATA, 2015-16

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

nature of agricultural income, exemption u/s. 10(1) was rightly denied and same was treated as income from the other sources.” 33. On going through the bunch of evidence where in the holding of land is as much as 230 vighas are in possession and the assessee has placed on records the accounts of the agricultural income, corroborated this income

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

68 of the Act read with section 115BBE \nof the Act. \n\n6. Aggrieved from the order of Assessing Officer, assessee preferred an \nappeal before the ld. CIT(A). Apropos to the grounds so raised the relevant \nfinding of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below: \n\nGround Nos.1, 2 & 3 \n\n5.2 I have considered the facts

RAJENDRA KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CEN CIR 1 , C-SCHEME, JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

natural justice in passing the impugned order dated 06.02.2025 by not deciding the application filed by the appellant under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 for taking the additional evidence on record of the balance confirmation produced before him regarding the unsecured loans taken during the year from 53 parties for which the addition to the declared income

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

natural \njustice. The requirements of natural justice must depend on the circumstances of \nthe case, the nature of the inquiry, the rules under which the tribunal is acting, the \nsubject matter to be dealt with and so forth. Can the Courts supplement the \nstatutory procedures with requirements over and above those specified? In order \nto ensure a fair hearing, Courts

PEEYUSH AGARWAL,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result Ground and 1 and 2 raised by the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

68 of the Act as cash deposits amounting to Rs 7,09,50,000/- are accepted as explained looking to the view of principle of natural justice and human tendency. In view of the discussion in the previous paras, it is established and concrete evidence that the assessee completely failed to explain the source of cash deposited in his account

RADHAKISHAN BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Justice of that High Court in Talati and Talati LLP, it was held as follows- -(22) From a further reading of Explanation 1 and Explanation 2 attached to Section 148, it is clear that the provisions Under Section 148 for issuance of notice before making assessment re-assessment or re-computation under Section 147 operate in two different ways

RADHAKISHNA BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Justice of that High Court in Talati and Talati LLP, it was held as follows- -(22) From a further reading of Explanation 1 and Explanation 2 attached to Section 148, it is clear that the provisions Under Section 148 for issuance of notice before making assessment re-assessment or re-computation under Section 147 operate in two different ways

KALINDEE ESTATES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

natural justice and deserves to be set aside and\nconsequent addition deserve to be deleted\n1.1\nOn the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Id. CIT(A)\nhas erred in making observations in money routed back which is not at all\nbacked/supported by any evidence brought on recorded

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 151A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That assessment made without providing the assessee the material on which addition has been made is against principles of natural justice and denies the assessee fair opportunity to put up his case. Non provision of information makes the assessment illegal. Assessee has been denied reasonable opportunity to put up his case

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, had abused the power by acting arbitrarily and passed a totally unlawful order. In such a case, instead of filing an Appeal against the order of the learned CIT (A), the department should pull up the learned AO and start disciplinary proceedings against him so that such bad orders are not passed In this case the learned

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

natural justice and is illegal and bad in law. 3. That on the law and in the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned Assessing Officer grossly erred in making additions in the absence of any incriminating materials found during the course of search and the additions are made beyond the search material which is illegal