SAMARTH LIFESTYLE RETAILING PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

section 68 of the I.T Act, 1961, the AO has to examine three\ningredients ie., identity, genuineness of transactions and\ncreditworthiness of the parties. In this factual and legal background, if\nyou examine, the present case in the light of various evidences filed by\nthe assessee, in order to prove credit found in the form of share capital\nand

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

17A and sub-rule (5) of rule 2C of the Income-tax\nRules, 1962 ( the Rules)\nto the Principal Commissioner or\nCommissioner authorised by the Board. This Circular\nonly relates to cancellation of registration/approval or\nprovisional registration/approval in the case of \"specified\nviolation\"\n[Para 1]\nPG. NO.\n1-9\n2.\nCircular no. 21 of 2016\nissued by CBDT\nWith

MANAV VIKAS AVAM YOGA PRASIKSHAN SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

17A. The application was rejected by Id. CIT(E) vide order dated 24/06/19 ‘’holding that the applicant was asked to file details, vide letter/note sheet entries as discussed above but no details were filed.’’ It is mandatory that Section 12AA requires the ld. CIT(E) to satisfy himself about the objects of the trust and the genuineness

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

section 80G of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, for the sake of convenience, we dispose off all the grounds through a consolidated order. 5. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee reiterated the arguments as were raised by him before the ld. CIT (Exemption) and also relied on the written submission submitted before us which are reproduced

ARYA SAMAJ MANDIR ,BHILWARA vs. CIT(E) , JAIPUR

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

section 80G of the IT Act, 1961. Therefore, for the sake\nof convenience, we dispose off all the grounds through a consolidated order.\n5. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee reiterated the arguments as were raised\nby him before the ld. CIT (Exemption) and also relied on the written submission\nsubmitted before us which are reproduced

M/S BHIVARAM PANNALAL KUMAWAT,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

Appeal are disposed off and all the appeals of the

Bench: Us By The Department. The Facts As Well As Issues, Are More Or Less Involving The Disallowance Of Labour Expenses & Therefore, These Twelve Appeals Were Head

68 could be made. CIT VS. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd. [2017] 398 ITR 584 (Bom.) (HC) The scope of assessment u/s 153A of the Act is limited to the incriminating evidence found during the search and no further CIT VS. Gurinder Singh Bawa [2016] 386 ITR 483 (Bom.) (HC) Once anassessment was not pending but had attained finality

DCIT, CC-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S BHIVARAM PANNALAL KUMAWAT, JAIPUR

Appeal are disposed off and all the appeals of the

Bench: Us By The Department. The Facts As Well As Issues, Are More Or Less Involving The Disallowance Of Labour Expenses & Therefore, These Twelve Appeals Were Head

68 could be made. CIT VS. SKS Ispat and Power Ltd. [2017] 398 ITR 584 (Bom.) (HC) The scope of assessment u/s 153A of the Act is limited to the incriminating evidence found during the search and no further CIT VS. Gurinder Singh Bawa [2016] 386 ITR 483 (Bom.) (HC) Once anassessment was not pending but had attained finality

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. NARESH KUMAR GUPTA, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the

Bench: Him The Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, [ For Short “Act” ] By The Acit, Circle, Sri Ganganagar [

68,474 and debtors of Rs. 349,45,15,887 totalling to Rs. 403,79,84,361. Ld. AR argued in hearing that on analysis of the debtors it is seen that the outstanding debtors relating to group concern of the assessee works out to Rs. 175,63,73,496 as on 31/03/2014 comprising of the following parties only:- Nand

SHANKAR JHALANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

17A) submitted that he has produced the medical treatment prescriptions to the AO on 11.04.2016. All the evidences in support of the addition made are placed in the paper book containing 102 pages. The AO did not examine the same simply because AR of the assessee reached late on 15.04.2016 and the AO by that time has already prepared