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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for\nshort \"Act\"] by the ACIT / DCIT, Circle-5, Jaipur [ for short AO].\n\n2.\nITA No.33/JP/2025\nShree Durga Jewellers vs. ACIT\nIn this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: -\n\"1. On the facts and in the circumnutates of the case as well as law Id AO erred in\nmaking

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)

3) on n 09.12.2019, determining total income at Rs. 21,46,600/- inter-alia making the following additions. S Particulars Amount No. 1 Unexplained income under section 69A on account of Cash 8,85,500.00 deposit in bank 885000/- u/s 68 of the IT Act 2 Additions under section 68 6,45,810.00 Total 15,31,310.00 Aggrieved

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 /

3) on n 09.12.2019, determining total income at Rs. 21,46,600/- inter-alia making the following additions. S Particulars Amount No. 1 Unexplained income under section 69A on account of Cash 8,85,500.00 deposit in bank 885000/- u/s 68 of the IT Act 2 Additions under section 68 6,45,810.00 Total 15,31,310.00 Aggrieved

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)

section 68 of Act as the explanation furnished by you in respect of 347 bills during the short period available in the evening of 08.11.2016 does not sound plausible. The assessee submitted its reply which reads as under : 1. That as per the information submitted earlier in the course of assessment proceedings assessee has got a retail outlet

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

JITENDRA KUMAR TAHILRAMANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, JAIPUR., JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

3) of the Act and rejected the book results. As regards the contention of the assessee for verification of the sales by invoking the provision of section 133(6) [ calling for any information from any person or any officer ] , section 131 [ Summons enforcing attendance of any person or any officer and examine him on oath ] and Section

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. In regard to the complete ledger accounts of the persons as mentioned at page no. 71A (back side of the page no. 71) from whom assessee has received the advances against sale of agriculture land, it is submitted that assessee does not maintain any of books of accounts for his personal transaction, therefore ledger account since opening

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. In regard to the complete ledger accounts of the persons as mentioned at page no. 71A (back side of the page no. 71) from whom assessee has received the advances against sale of agriculture land, it is submitted that assessee does not maintain any of books of accounts for his personal transaction, therefore ledger account since opening

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. In regard to the complete ledger accounts of the persons as mentioned at page no. 71A (back side of the page no. 71) from whom assessee has received the advances against sale of agriculture land, it is submitted that assessee does not maintain any of books of accounts for his personal transaction, therefore ledger account since opening

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. In regard to the complete ledger accounts of the persons as mentioned at page no. 71A (back side of the page no. 71) from whom assessee has received the advances against sale of agriculture land, it is submitted that assessee does not maintain any of books of accounts for his personal transaction, therefore ledger account since opening

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)

section 68 cannot be made 1 ITO Vs. Amar Pratap Steels Pvt. Ltd. [2025] 170 taxmann.com 197 65-91 (Jaipur - Trib.)] 2. K.P. Manish Global Ingredients Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, Company Circle-II(4), 92-96 Chennai [2021 131 taxmann.com 158(Chennai-Trib)] 3

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

131 taxmann.com 42 (Gujarat) HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT Sameer Gulabchand Shah HUF v.\nIncome-tax Officer, Ward 1(3)\n24\n[2021] 127 taxmann.com 679 (Gujarat)\nHIGH COURT OF GUJARAT Silverdale Inn (P.) Ltd. v.\n25\n[2021] 129 taxmann.com 68 (Gujarat) HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT\nVilas Vrajlal Parekh HUF\n26\n[2021] 133 taxmann.com 397 (Gujarat) HIGH COURT

SHRI HARI NARAIN GATTANI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, C-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

131 of the I.T. Act, 1961 wherein he accepted that the cash found in possession of Sh. Atul Kumar Gupta was his current year’s income i.e. F.Y. 2016-17 (A.Y. 2017-18) and thereafter, a search warrant u/s 132 was issued in the name of assessee and the bag in his possession was searched at 421, 4th Floor, Saraogi

BALAJI JEWELLERS ,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CC -4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Section 145(3) then only Fair Income may be estimated which should be based on past results if available, in this matter assesse has a long past history which are undisputable therefore in view of past history estimated profit should be calculated by applying a suitable Net Profit Ratio. Many landmark judgements are supporting this contention as follows

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

Section 40(a)(ia) provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are generally allowed under the general section. The computation u/s.29 has to be made u/s.145 on the basis of books of account regularly maintained by the assessee which the Assessing Officer did by estimating the profit at 5% of the sales. The learned

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU vs. BAGARIA TRADE IMPEX, CHURU

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed and order of the AO is\nconfirmed

3) for the A.Y. 2013-14 and addition u/s 68 of the Act was made in the total\nxome of the assessee on account of unexplained credits in books of accounts on the same issue of lako\nmpanies. Further it is also very important to mention here that the above named companies are dummy\ncompanies as accepted by the Jain

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU vs. BAGARIA TRADE IMPEX, CHURU

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed and order of the AO is\nconfirmed

3) for the A.Y. 2013-14 and addition u/s 68 of the Act was made in the total\nxome of the assessee on account of unexplained credits in books of accounts on the same issue of lako\nmpanies. Further it is also very important to mention here that the above named companies are dummy\ncompanies as accepted by the Jain

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU vs. BAGARIA TRADE IMPEX, CHURU

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed and order of the AO is\nconfirmed

3) for the A.Y. 2013-14 and addition u/s 68 of the Act was made in the total\nxome of the assessee on account of unexplained credits in books of accounts on the same issue of lako\nmpanies. Further it is also very important to mention here that the above named companies are dummy\ncompanies as accepted by the Jain

SHRI NAWAL KISHORE SONI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed whereas all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 or section 69 or section 69A or section 69B or section 69C or section 69D. 24. We observe that this amendment takes effect from 1st of April, 2017 and will, accordingly, apply from assessment year 2017-18 and subsequent assessment years. Accordingly, we hold that the assessee current loss is allowable