DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SH. ASHWANI GUPTA, JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

68,450/- against the aforesaid carried\nforward cash loans and cash loans taken during the year, which is also in violation\nto the provisions of section 269T of the I.T. Act, 1961. Also it is noted that\nassessment order in this case was passed on 23.03.2024. The Addi/Jt. CIT finally\nsummarized in the penalty order that the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SH. ASHWANI GUPTA, JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

68,450/- against the aforesaid carried\nforward cash loans and cash loans taken during the year, which is also in violation\nto the provisions of section 269T of the I.T. Act, 1961. Also it is noted that\nassessment order in this case was passed on 23.03.2024. The Addi/Jt. CIT finally\nsummarized in the penalty order that the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. ASHWANI GUPTA, JAIPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

68,450/- against the aforesaid carried\nforward cash loans and cash loans taken during the year, which is also in violation\nto the provisions of section 269T of the I.T. Act, 1961. Also it is noted that\nassessment order in this case was passed on 23.03.2024. The Addi/Jt. CIT finally\nsummarized in the penalty order that the assessee

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003\ndisposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of\nthe financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition\nof penalty has been initiated, are completed

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)

246A of the Act in Form No. 35 on 26.12.2019 (Refer page No. 63-66 of Paper Book). During the pendency of the Appeal against the confirmed demand, Appellant’s return of income for AY 2018-19 was processed by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) vide Order dated 13.01.2020 issued under section 143(1) of the Act for refund

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

section 263 or section 264, after the expiry of six months from the end of\nthe month in which such order of revision is passed,\n(c) in any other case, after the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the\ncourse of which action for the imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003 disposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003 disposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003\ndisposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of\nthe financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition\nof penalty has been initiated, are completed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003\ndisposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of\nthe financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition\nof penalty has been initiated, are completed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003\ndisposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of\nthe financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition\nof penalty has been initiated, are completed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003\ndisposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of\nthe financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition\nof penalty has been initiated, are completed

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S GOKUL KRIPA COLONIZERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

246A, and the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or\nthe Commissioner (Appeals) passes the order on or after the 1st day of June, 2003\ndisposing of such appeal, an order imposing penalty shall be passed before the expiry of\nthe financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for imposition\nof penalty has been initiated, are completed

ASSOCIATED SOAPSTONE DISTRIBUTING CO PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

68,75,687.25\n3.\nInterest on Term Loan\n1,42,38,661.07\n4.\nInterest paid to NBFC\n1,31,17,681.00\n5.\nInterest on LC and Hundies\n1,13,52,841.24\n6.\nBank Charges\n33,30,812.44\n7.\nInterest on delayed payments\n2,99,209.00\n8\nITA243/JP/2023\nASSOCIATED SOAPSTONE DISTRIBUTING CO. PVT LTD. VS Pr.CIT-2, JAIPUR

URMILA RAJENDRA MUNDRA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

In the result grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

68 (Rule 129) which also has been denied by AO since considered such disallowances as “MISREPORTING” enclosed copy of notice u/sec. 270AA dated 02/05/2024 of Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(2), Ajmer. (Page 3 to 4) Under similar circumstances; Hon’ble ITAT in Appeal No. 68/JODH/2024 A.Y. 2017-18 in case of Triupati Jewellers Jodhpur has held; Copy Enclosed. (Page

RASAL BUILDERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Us. 2 M/S Rasal Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ito

246A or an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal under section 253, after the expiry of the financial year in which the proceedings, in the course of which action for 23 M/s Rasal Builders & Developers Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO imposition of penalty has been initiated, are completed, or six months from the end of the month in which the order

MANGI LAL KANDOI ,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

68 on page no. 77 & 78 of the order of the Hon'ble ITAT wherein the Hon'ble ITAT has allowed the set off of an amount of Rs. 78,74,000/- an account of alleged undisclosed advances in assessment year 2013-14 and have restricted the addition on account of advances in the A.Y. 2013-14 to Rs.1

SH. ASHOK KUMAR PORWAL,JHALAWAR vs. JCIT, RANGE-1, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

68 of the Act. The next case is on a fact where the director of the company obtained cash loan from a financier and deposited the cash in the bank account which is not the facts of the present case. The last case is where the assessee failed to discharge its burden in proving that there was a reasonable cause