SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

68 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the entire addition of Rs. 24,46,250, made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. In the facts and circumstances

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

68 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the entire addition of Rs. 24,46,250, made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. In the facts and circumstances

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

68 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the entire addition of Rs. 24,46,250, made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. In the facts and circumstances

SHRI DIPENDRA SINGH,TONK vs. ACIT CEN CIR 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA

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

68 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the entire addition of Rs. 24,46,250, made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A). 4. In the facts and circumstances

PRAMILA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(5), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

153D have prevalence over regular provisions for assessment or\nreassessment under sections 148 & 147/148 - Held, yes - Whether therefore, where\nbasis for initiation of section 148 proceedings in case of assessee was material seized\nrelating to or belonging to assessee during search conducted on ‘M' Group, notices\nissued under section 148 and impugned orders rejecting objections filed

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

Section 153D and the authoritative judicial pronouncements cited hereinabove, it is respectfully submitted that the approvals accorded by the JCIT, Central Range, Jaipur, having been granted in a mechanical manner without any application of mind, are invalid in law. Consequently, the assessment orders passed pursuant to such defective 44 ITA Nos. 56 to 61/JP/2025 Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the DCIT vs. Sapna Karnani seized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted or requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to apply to the regular proceedings and also in cases where

SHIVAM READYMIX PRIVATE LIMITED,NEEMUCH vs. THE PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

153D - Held, yes [Para 32] [In favour of assessee] Section 263, read with sections 153A and 143, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Revision – Of orders prejudicial to interest of revenue (Scope of provision) - Assessment years 2015-16 to 2018-19 - Whether when Assessing Officer had conducted detailed enquiry, examined seized records, made necessary observations in assessment order

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 68 of the Act are not satisfied. However the appellant / Id. AR has submitted ledger account of Kotak Bank loan and made arguments regarding Kotak Bank Loan and contended that bank loan cannot be treated as unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 68 of the Act are not satisfied. However the appellant / Id. AR has submitted ledger account of Kotak Bank loan and made arguments regarding Kotak Bank Loan and contended that bank loan cannot be treated as unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

section 68 of the Act are not satisfied. However the appellant / Id. AR has submitted ledger account of Kotak Bank loan and made arguments regarding Kotak Bank Loan and contended that bank loan cannot be treated as unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

section 68 of the Act are not satisfied. However the appellant / Id. AR has submitted ledger account of Kotak Bank loan and made arguments regarding Kotak Bank Loan and contended that bank loan cannot be treated as unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

section 68 of the Act are not satisfied. However the appellant / Id. AR has submitted ledger account of Kotak Bank loan and made arguments regarding Kotak Bank Loan and contended that bank loan cannot be treated as unexplained and that the substantial entries are matching in the ledger account in Jai Shree Ram and Ambika Garments. Accordingly the addition

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the\n17\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\nseized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted\nor requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to\napply to the regular proceedings and also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the\n17\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\nseized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted\nor requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to\napply to the regular proceedings and also

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

153D and Section 148 are different Applicability of Section 153C in cases where the\n\n17\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Sapna Karnani\nseized material related to or belonged toperson other than on whom search is conducted\nor requisition made does not render Section 148 otiose Section 148 shall continue to\napply to the regular proceedings

CHATRU,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 721 to 727/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2015-16 to 2021-2022 Shri Chatru, Nimod, Malarana Dunger, Sawai Madhpur. cuke Vs. The DCIT, Central Circle, Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: BUVPC 1977 N vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Tarun Mittal, CA, Shri Harshit Agarwal, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : MS Alka Gautam

68 of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of business income of Rs. 1,40,500/- declared by the assessee and invoking the provisions of section 115BBE for taxing the same. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the invocation

CHATRU,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

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

68 of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of business income of Rs. 1,40,500/- declared by the assessee and invoking the provisions of section 115BBE for taxing the same. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the invocation

CHATRU,SAWAI MADHOPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

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

68 of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of business income of Rs. 1,40,500/- declared by the assessee and invoking the provisions of section 115BBE for taxing the same. The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the invocation