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)

d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 450/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2017-18 cuke Badri Lal Agarwal through Legal Income Tax Officer, Vs. heir Smt. Geeta Devi Ward- 1(4), Jaipur G-5, Shyama Residency

SUWALKA AND SUWALKA PROPERTIES AND BUILDERS PVT LTD,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, KOTA, KOTA, RAJASTHAN

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

d) of the Income-tax Act empowers the Income-tax (IT) Authorities to issue commissions. The powers granted to the authorities under section 131 are derived from the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). Section 75, read with Rules 1 to 14 of Order XXVI of the CPC, states that a commission can be issued, among other things

TRANSINDIA NONWOVENS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 267/JP/2021 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 DCIT, cuke Transindia Nonwovens Private Limited P-47 P-47 Raj Angan Society NRI Colony, Vs. CPC, Bengaluru. Sec. 24, Jaipur

SHREE DURGA JEWELLERS,JAWAHAR NAGAR JAIPUR vs. AO CIRCLE 4 JAIPUR, CR BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

d).\nWithout doubting opening stock, purchases and sales (e). On mistaken belief of\nquantum of cash deposits and cash sales made during demonetisation, Which is\nhighly unjustified, illegal and liable to be quashed entirely.\n2. Assessee deserves right to amend, alter, delete and modify any ground of\nappeal on or before the date of hearing of appeal.”\n3. Succinctly

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LTD, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

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

131 (Raj.)(HC) CIT Vs. Jaipur VidyutVitran Nigam Ltd. [2014] 98 DTR 105 (Raj.) (HC) CIT Vs. Udaipur DugdhUtpadakSahakariSangh Ltd. (2013) 98 DTR 109 (Raj.)(HC) 4. Amendment brought by FA, 2021 by way of Explanation 2 to section 36(1)(va) and Explanation 5 to section 43B which provides that the definition of due dates

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LTD, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

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

131 (Raj.)(HC) CIT Vs. Jaipur VidyutVitran Nigam Ltd. [2014] 98 DTR 105 (Raj.) (HC) CIT Vs. Udaipur DugdhUtpadakSahakariSangh Ltd. (2013) 98 DTR 109 (Raj.)(HC) 4. Amendment brought by FA, 2021 by way of Explanation 2 to section 36(1)(va) and Explanation 5 to section 43B which provides that the definition of due dates

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LTD, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

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

131 (Raj.)(HC) CIT Vs. Jaipur VidyutVitran Nigam Ltd. [2014] 98 DTR 105 (Raj.) (HC) CIT Vs. Udaipur DugdhUtpadakSahakariSangh Ltd. (2013) 98 DTR 109 (Raj.)(HC) 4. Amendment brought by FA, 2021 by way of Explanation 2 to section 36(1)(va) and Explanation 5 to section 43B which provides that the definition of due dates

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

131 ITR 497 (AP) • CIT vs. Radhaswami Satsang Sabha (1954) 25 ITR 472 36. It was further submitted that it is an established legal position that granting of loan or financial assistance by a charitable trust/institution for advancement of its own objectives is application of income under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. It has also been clarified

ABHAY CHORDIA,JAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

1,09,76,250 and income tax has been deposited on such income. Hence, Section 68 per se cannot be invoked in this case.Provisions of Section 68 can only be invoked in cases where an assessee is unable to explain the source of a particular receipt to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer. These provisions have no application

M/S READY ROTI INDIA PVT. LTD.,F-28, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SARE KHURD, ALWAR vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

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

131 (Raj.) (HC) CIT Vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. [2014] 98 DTR 105 (Raj.) (HC) CIT Vs. Udaipur DugdhUtpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (2013) 98 DTR 109 (Raj.) (HC) 3 M/S. READY ROTI INDIA PVT LTD. VS ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR 1. Amendment brought by FA, 2021 by way of Explanation 2 to section 36(1)(va) and Explanation

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

d) Sh. Shaurya Kumar. (e) Sh. Amit Agarwal. (f) Sh. Ronak Kumar. (iv) Furnish the cash flow statement or cash book from 01/04/2014 to 31.03.2015 for the year under consideration. In absence on any of fulfillment of any of the requirement you are asked to show cause as to why the addition of Rs. 2.75 Crore may not be made

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

d) Sh. Shaurya Kumar. (e) Sh. Amit Agarwal. (f) Sh. Ronak Kumar. (iv) Furnish the cash flow statement or cash book from 01/04/2014 to 31.03.2015 for the year under consideration. In absence on any of fulfillment of any of the requirement you are asked to show cause as to why the addition of Rs. 2.75 Crore may not be made

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

d) Sh. Shaurya Kumar. (e) Sh. Amit Agarwal. (f) Sh. Ronak Kumar. (iv) Furnish the cash flow statement or cash book from 01/04/2014 to 31.03.2015 for the year under consideration. In absence on any of fulfillment of any of the requirement you are asked to show cause as to why the addition of Rs. 2.75 Crore may not be made

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

d) Sh. Shaurya Kumar. (e) Sh. Amit Agarwal. (f) Sh. Ronak Kumar. (iv) Furnish the cash flow statement or cash book from 01/04/2014 to 31.03.2015 for the year under consideration. In absence on any of fulfillment of any of the requirement you are asked to show cause as to why the addition of Rs. 2.75 Crore may not be made

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

d s le{k\nBEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, \nvk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos.466 to 468/JP/2025\nfu/kZkj.k o\"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19\nAnshu Sahai (HUF) \nSP-15 Bhabha Marg Tilak Nagar,\nTilak Nagar, S.O. (Jaipur), \nJaipur \ncuke \nVs. \nACIT, \nCentral Circle-02, \nJaipur \nLFkk;h y s[kk la-@thvkb Zvkj

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)

D. Once an assessee has submitted the documents relating to identity, genuineness of the transaction and creditworthiness, then it is for the AO to conduct a further enquiry and call for more details before invoking Section 68 of the I.T. Act 1. Kale Khan Mohammad Hanif v. CIT [1963] 50 ITR 1

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)

D- 19, NEW COLONY, GUMANPURA, Kota for the Assessment Year 2017-18 PAN AFFPS21348 Application for condonation of delay u/s 253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with section 5 of Limitation Act in filling of appeal SHRI UPENDRAF KUMAR SONI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA Hon'ble Sir(s), The humble assessee appellant applicant respectfully prays

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-KOTA, 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)

D- 19, NEW COLONY, GUMANPURA, Kota for the Assessment Year 2017-18 PAN AFFPS21348 Application for condonation of delay u/s 253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with section 5 of Limitation Act in filling of appeal SHRI UPENDRAF KUMAR SONI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA Hon'ble Sir(s), The humble assessee appellant applicant respectfully prays

MRS. RENU SEHGAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is allowed and that of the

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 837/Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 Cuke The Acit Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs. Central Circle-3 27, Onkar Nagar, Civil Lines Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 708 & 709 Jp/2018 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2015-16 Cuke Mrs. Renu Sehgal The Dcit Vs. 227-278, Nemisagar Colony Central Circle-3, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aepps 3048 M Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Varinder Mehta, Cit-Dr Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal, Ca Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2019 ?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 19/08/2019 Vkns'K@ Order Per Vijay Pal Rao, Jm There Are Cross Appeals For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Directed Against The Order Dated 09-04-2013 Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur. The 2 Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs Dcit, Central Circle-3, Jaipur

d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k Before : Shri Vijay Pal Rao, JM & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 837/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke The ACIT Smt. Renu Sehgal Vs. Central Circle-3 27, Onkar Nagar, Civil Lines Jaipur Jaipur LFkk