VIJAY KUMAR VIJAYVERGIYA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPIUR

In the result ground no. 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the Assessee was having 60 days time to file an appeal before the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal against the order of the Ld. CIT(A). It is hereby submitted that the Assessee filed an appeal through the online portal of the ITAT on 31.05.2022, which is within the said timeline. Therefore

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

2. It is submitted that as per the provisions of section 132(4A) the Act is presumed that the contents of the books of accounts and other documents found in the possession or control of any person in the course of search are true. Similar presumption drawn 292C the Act for the purpose of assessment. Section 292C reads

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

2. It is submitted that as per the provisions of section 132(4A) the Act is presumed that the contents of the books of accounts and other documents found in the possession or control of any person in the course of search are true. Similar presumption drawn 292C the Act for the purpose of assessment. Section 292C reads

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

2. It is submitted that as per the provisions of section 132(4A) the Act is presumed that the contents of the books of accounts and other documents found in the possession or control of any person in the course of search are true. Similar presumption drawn 292C the Act for the purpose of assessment. Section 292C reads

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

2. It is submitted that as per the provisions of section 132(4A) the Act is presumed that the contents of the books of accounts and other documents found in the possession or control of any person in the course of search are true. Similar presumption drawn 292C the Act for the purpose of assessment. Section 292C reads

SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

68. Accordingly, ld. AO appropriately did not transgress his jurisdiction. His action was well in accordance with the law. 4. The assessment was completed on the basis of exhaustive enquiries made by ld. AO and detailed submissions along with relevant documents placed on record by the assessee Company. Thus, no error can be attributed to such an order passed

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)

section 68 of the Act. While making the addition ld. AO relied upon the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in 32 Rajendra Kumar Agrawal vs. ACIT the case of Commissioner of Income Tax-VI Vs. T. S. Kishan & Co. Ltd., [2014] 50 taxmann.com 368 (Delhi). This decision deals with the share capital credit

SHRI SHRAVAN CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

68% shares. It is further noticed that M/s. Saj Properties Pvt. Ltd. has accumulated profits to the tune of Rs. 7,48,07,150/-. The transaction is covered under the provisions of section 2(22)(e). The addition is to be made in A.Y. 2010-11 in the hands of Sh. Sharwan Choudhary PAN No. ABIPC

PRADEEP VATRANA,ALWAR vs. DCIT, ALWAR

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

2. During the course of hearing, ld. AR submitted that the assessee derives income from interest, rent and share trading. He filed the return declaring income of Rs. 58,68,080/- which included long term capital gain of Rs.32,73,855/- after claiming deduction u/s 54 of Rs. 20 lakhs. 2.1 In course of assessment proceedings, assessee explained that

M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

2,19,09,882/- 3,41,539/- 30,944/- At the outset it is submitted that Undisclosed Sales of assessee has been computed by ld. AO in a mechanical manner and are absolutely contrary to the fact on record. As evident from the AO’s observation, the additions in respect of alleged unaccounted sales have been made u/s 68

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

2,19,09,882/- 3,41,539/- 30,944/- At the outset it is submitted that Undisclosed Sales of assessee has been computed by ld. AO in a mechanical manner and are absolutely contrary to the fact on record. As evident from the AO’s observation, the additions in respect of alleged unaccounted sales have been made u/s 68

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

2,19,09,882/- 3,41,539/- 30,944/- At the outset it is submitted that Undisclosed Sales of assessee has been computed by ld. AO in a mechanical manner and are absolutely contrary to the fact on record. As evident from the AO’s observation, the additions in respect of alleged unaccounted sales have been made u/s 68

M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

2,19,09,882/- 3,41,539/- 30,944/- At the outset it is submitted that Undisclosed Sales of assessee has been computed by ld. AO in a mechanical manner and are absolutely contrary to the fact on record. As evident from the AO’s observation, the additions in respect of alleged unaccounted sales have been made u/s 68

M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

2,19,09,882/- 3,41,539/- 30,944/- At the outset it is submitted that Undisclosed Sales of assessee has been computed by ld. AO in a mechanical manner and are absolutely contrary to the fact on record. As evident from the AO’s observation, the additions in respect of alleged unaccounted sales have been made u/s 68

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

2,19,09,882/- 3,41,539/- 30,944/- At the outset it is submitted that Undisclosed Sales of assessee has been computed by ld. AO in a mechanical manner and are absolutely contrary to the fact on record. As evident from the AO’s observation, the additions in respect of alleged unaccounted sales have been made u/s 68

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

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

68. The court ruled that without\nconcrete evidence to establish the identities of the creditors, any addition\nto the income of the assessee based on unexplained cash credits is\n\n54\nITA Nos.480/JP/2025\nDCIT vs. Karnani Solvex Private Ltd.\n\nunwarranted.\n\n10.5 Moreover, in the Supreme Court decision of CIT v. Lovely Exports (P)\nLtd

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

68 of the Act on account of sundry creditors of Rs. 2,23,24,871/- by treating the same as unexplained cash credits. SHRI UPENDRAF KUMAR SONI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned lower authorities grossly erred in rejecting the books of accounts, in invoking the provisions

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-KOTA, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

68 of the Act on account of sundry creditors of Rs. 2,23,24,871/- by treating the same as unexplained cash credits. SHRI UPENDRAF KUMAR SONI VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA 5. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned lower authorities grossly erred in rejecting the books of accounts, in invoking the provisions

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 5.5. The appellant submitted that the AO has satisfied himself that appellant had taken accommodation entry in the shape of unsecured loans. The appellant submitted that it raised objections before AO against such reasons wherein it was categorically contended that appellant had not taken any unsecured loans from any of the party