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 of the Act and thereby assessed as such. A propose this ground the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is as under : Regarding the addition of Rs.6.45,810, which represents additional income offered by the appellant through revised computation and return, this amount stems from interest income of Rs.11.21.649 as per Form 26AS. According to the appellant

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 of the Act and thereby assessed as such. A propose this ground the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is as under : Regarding the addition of Rs.6.45,810, which represents additional income offered by the appellant through revised computation and return, this amount stems from interest income of Rs.11.21.649 as per Form 26AS. According to the appellant

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

5) SCR 285, the issue of what is\n\"prohibited by law\" was considered by this Court, in the context of interpretation of\na condition in a statutory license (for vending liquor) which prohibited transfer of the\nlicense by way of sub-letting or entering into a partnership agreement. While\ndealing with the recognition of such a partnership under

SAKET AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

68 days, his stay being much less than period of\n182 days as per statutory provisions of Act, he could not\nbe treated as resident of India and his status would be of\nnon-resident Indian for purpose of levying of tax as per\nprovisions of Act Held, yes [Para 10] [In favour of\nassessee]\"\nf. THE ITAT DELHI BENCH

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 1534 of the Act in pursuance of search or requisition is required to be made.” Following the above discussion based on judicial principles it is held that the AO was justified in rejecting the claim of enhanced agriculture income made Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT by the appellant in the assessment proceedings u/s 153A which

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

Section 1534 of the Act in pursuance of search or requisition is required to be made.” Following the above discussion based on judicial principles it is held that the AO was justified in rejecting the claim of enhanced agriculture income made Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT by the appellant in the assessment proceedings u/s 153A which

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

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

Section 1534 of the Act in pursuance of search or requisition is required to be made.” Following the above discussion based on judicial principles it is held that the AO was justified in rejecting the claim of enhanced agriculture income made Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT by the appellant in the assessment proceedings u/s 153A which

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Section 1534 of the Act in pursuance of search or requisition is required to be made.” Following the above discussion based on judicial principles it is held that the AO was justified in rejecting the claim of enhanced agriculture income made Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT by the appellant in the assessment proceedings u/s 153A which

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

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

Section 1534 of the Act in pursuance of search or requisition is required to be made.” Following the above discussion based on judicial principles it is held that the AO was justified in rejecting the claim of enhanced agriculture income made Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT by the appellant in the assessment proceedings u/s 153A which

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

Section 1534 of the Act in pursuance of search or requisition is required to be made.” Following the above discussion based on judicial principles it is held that the AO was justified in rejecting the claim of enhanced agriculture income made Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT by the appellant in the assessment proceedings u/s 153A which

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)

139 as per details given above. It is reiterated that provisions of section 68 are not applicable on the sale transaction recorded in the books of account as sales are already part of the income which is already credited in the Profit and loss account. 4.7. Sections 68 creates deeming fictions, whereby certain amounts which are not considered

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)

139; or (b) determined by the Assessing Officer includes any income referred to in section 68, section 69, section 69A, section 698B, section 69C or section 690, if such income is not covered under clause (a), the income- tax payable shall be the aggregate of (i) The amount of income-tax calculated

NITIN VIJAY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

139(1)\non 30.10.2017, declaring total income of Rs 3,50,470. Assessment u/s 143(3) was\ncompleted vide order, dated 23.12.2019, by making additions of Rs 1,73,56,000\nu/s 68 of Income Tax Act, 1961, on account of cash deposits in bank account.\nIII. Against the order passed by Id. AO, assessee preferred appeal before the\nNational

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

139 on 30/03/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 12567361029316 declaring total income of Rs. 13,06,680/- and agricultural income of Rs. 12,46,718/-. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, the assessee has e-filed its return of income on 08/02/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 615333541080217/- declaring income of Rs. 13,06,680/-. During the course of search cash

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

139 on 30/03/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 12567361029316 declaring total income of Rs. 13,06,680/- and agricultural income of Rs. 12,46,718/-. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, the assessee has e-filed its return of income on 08/02/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 615333541080217/- declaring income of Rs. 13,06,680/-. During the course of search cash

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

139 on 30/03/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 12567361029316 declaring total income of Rs. 13,06,680/- and agricultural income of Rs. 12,46,718/-. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, the assessee has e-filed its return of income on 08/02/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 615333541080217/- declaring income of Rs. 13,06,680/-. During the course of search cash

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

139 on 30/03/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 12567361029316 declaring total income of Rs. 13,06,680/- and agricultural income of Rs. 12,46,718/-. In response to notice u/s 153A of the Act, the assessee has e-filed its return of income on 08/02/2017 vide acknowledgement no. 615333541080217/- declaring income of Rs. 13,06,680/-. During the course of search cash

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

68 taxmann.com 298 (Kerala), the Kerala High Court held\r\nthat a return filed by assessee beyond period stipulated under section 139(1) or\r\n139(4) or under section 142(1) or section 148 can also be accepted and acted\r\nupon for entertaining claim raised under section 80P provided further\r\nproceedings in relation