DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed and that of the revenue is also stands dismissed

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

section 68 of the Act. Brief facts pertaining to this ground of appeal are that the appellant had deposited cash amounting to Rs.7,44,45,200/- in different bank accounts maintained by him which are described as under: Bank Name and Account No. Date of Amount (Rs.) deposit Bank of Baroda A/c No. _____ 2,45,000/- 1150100018582 Bank

SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed and that of the revenue is also stands dismissed

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

section 68 of the Act. Brief facts pertaining to this ground of appeal are that the appellant had deposited cash amounting to Rs.7,44,45,200/- in different bank accounts maintained by him which are described as under: Bank Name and Account No. Date of Amount (Rs.) deposit Bank of Baroda A/c No. _____ 2,45,000/- 1150100018582 Bank

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

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: 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

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

M/S. GURU KRIPA CAREER INSTITUTE PVT. LTD.,SIKAR vs. PR.CIT-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

68 to 69D read with section 115BBE In reply to these queries of the ld. Pr.CIT, the assessee has filed detailed submission. From the record we found that during the course of the survey action u/s 133A of the Act on 19.02.2015, while recording statement u/s 133A, Mr. Rajesh Kularia Director of the company offered a sum of Rs.3.00

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

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

DILIP MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3,, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 68 - Held, no”. 6 Shri Dilip Maheshwari, Jaipur. It is further submitted that cash was realized for the same cash advance slips found in course of search which were unexplained and, therefore, the same was surrendered as income of that year. It is thus realization of income which was already taxed in A.Y. 2016-17. The realization

SHRI MUJAFFAR HUSSEN,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Hon'Ble Tribunal For Condonation Of The Short Delay In Submission Of The Appeal.’’

section 68. The initial onus to show the genuineness and identity of transaction and the credit worthiness of the party is no doubt upon the appellant. Once that is done in the form of prima facie credible material, the AO has to then exert himself /her self to quote relevant material to disprove that onus and discharge the burden

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

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of\nthe above observations

Section 153D and the authoritative\njudicial pronouncements cited hereinabove, it is respectfully submitted that the\napprovals accorded by the JCIT, Central Range, Jaipur, having been granted in a\nmechanical manner without any application of mind, are invalid in law.\nConsequently, the assessment orders passed pursuant to such defective\n44\nITA Nos. 56 to 61/JP/2025\nShri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S N. M. AGROFOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 153A of the Act, every case where there was search or requisition, the AO is obliged to issue notice to such person furnish returns of income for the six years preceding the assessment year relevant to the previous year which the search conducted or requisition is made, any addition or disallowance can made only on the basis

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. SHRI DULHE RAM MEENA, JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

section 68 of the Act.  The deletion of this addition by the CIT (A) without any discussion of the issue in his Appeal Order is perverse and bad in law.  The nature of the transaction could not be proved by the assessee.  Rupal Jain vs Commissioner of Income tax (2023) 152 taxmann.com 346 (SC)  MrsRupal Jain vs Commissioner

AJEET KUMAR RAMPURIA,TONK vs. ITO WARD 7(2), TONK

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

68 or section 69 of the Act is on the assessee. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has further held that explanation offered by the assessee should be carefully examined by the AO to ascertain whether all the ingredients of the onus are proved by the assessee or not. The assessee is required to discharge the onus by producing evidence

DALAS BIOTECH LIMITED,BHIWADI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with no orders as to cost

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

248 and 251 to 252 of paper book. 14.2 In view of the above, there remains no ambiguity that amount of Rs. 5 crore each received from Shri Ramesh Thakor and Shri Vinod Sharma represent repayment of advances given by the assessee in the month of February 2009. Therefore the provision of section 68

MANOHAR LAL CHUGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

section 68 of the Act and commission paid @ 6% to the tune of Rs. 82,248/- was added total

HARISH SHARMA HUF,B-1, PATODIYA MARG, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

68. 17 Harish Sharma HUF, Jaipur vs. ITO, Jaipur 4. It may be noted that Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in case of PCIT Vs. Swati Bajaj vide order dt. 14.06.2022 in bunch of cases involving 90 cases where the Tribunal in a single order allowed the appeal of assessee with reference to the order of CIT(A)/ order

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. NISHA JAIN, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

248(2013) 352 ITR 480 (SC) / (2012) 25 taxmann.com 413 (SC). 6.3.2 Moreover in a comparatively recent case of Pr. CIT, Central -2, New Delhi v. Meeta Gutgutia [2017] 82 taxmann.com 287 (Delhi) Hon’ble Delhi High Court referred to the decision of the Kerala High Court in Paul Mathews & Sons v. CIT [2003] 263 ITR 101/129 Taxman