GOVINDAM BRJ INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIR-6,JPR, JAIPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

271A and 272A(1)(d), which are not sustainable when the primary addition itself is not justified. 8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all of the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing.” 3. We find that both these appeals filed by the assessee are delayed by 68 days each

GOVINDAM BRJ INFRA PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIR-6,JPR, JAIPUR

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

271A and 272A(1)(d), which are not\nsustainable when the primary addition itself is not justified.\n8. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or delete any or all of the above\ngrounds of appeal at the time of hearing.\"\n3.\nWe find that both these appeals filed by the assessee are delayed by 68 days\neach

SMT. ROSHNI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the levy of penalty under section 271B is hereby deleted

Bench: Us.

section 271(1)(c) is hereby confirmed. 9. Regarding levy of penalty U/s 271A of the Act for non-maintenance of books of accounts, during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the total receipt/turnover of the assessee business from both M/s Krishna Electronics and M/s Jharkhand Electric & Electronics, amounts to Rs.1,02,68

SMT. ROSHNI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the levy of penalty under section 271B is hereby deleted

Bench: Us.

section 271(1)(c) is hereby confirmed. 9. Regarding levy of penalty U/s 271A of the Act for non-maintenance of books of accounts, during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the total receipt/turnover of the assessee business from both M/s Krishna Electronics and M/s Jharkhand Electric & Electronics, amounts to Rs.1,02,68

SMT. ROSHNI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the levy of penalty under section 271B is hereby deleted

Bench: Us.

section 271(1)(c) is hereby confirmed. 9. Regarding levy of penalty U/s 271A of the Act for non-maintenance of books of accounts, during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer observed that the total receipt/turnover of the assessee business from both M/s Krishna Electronics and M/s Jharkhand Electric & Electronics, amounts to Rs.1,02,68

SHRI RAI SINGH SIHAG,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3-1, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 441/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Rai Singh Sihag, Cuke I.T.O. Vs. B-105, Vaishali Nagar, Ward- 3(1), Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Bgvps 4485 F Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta & Shri S.L. Jain (Advs.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By :Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 02/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 15/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 13/07/2017 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. The Reasons For Reopening Of The Assessment Not Valid :- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Ao Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Invoking Action U/S 147.The Notice For Reassessment Is So Hastily Issued Without Examining The Correct Factual & Legal Position. The Action For Reassessment Is Often Made Without Application Of Mind Fairly & Objectively The Ao. Lakhmani Mewal Das 103 Itr 437 (Sc)

68 of the Act of Rs. 10,53,700/- lacs were made on account of the fact that the amount of Rs. 10,53,700/- lacs were deposited in the bank account and the assessee had filed to explain the source of cash deposits. 4. Being aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee carried the matter before

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SHRI VASU DEV SOMANI, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SHRI MANISH KUMAR SINGHAL, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, AJMER vs. ABHISHEK KUMAWAT, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, AJMER vs. ABHISHEK KUMAWAT, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMENR vs. SMT. SUDARSHNA SOMANI, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SMT. SUDARSHNA SOMANI, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SMT. SUDARSHNA SOMANI, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SMT. KUSUM DEVI VIJAYVARGIYA, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER vs. SHRI MANISH KUMAR SINGHAL, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMENR, AJMER vs. SHRI MANISH KUMAR SINGHAL, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KISHANGARH vs. SHRI RAJU, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER vs. SHRI GOVIND NARAYAN SHARMA, KISHANGARH

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

section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed as under: ACIT vs. Smt. Kusum Devi Vijayvargiya & others “Sec. 68 refers to cash credits which are found in the books of the assessee. If the explanation offered by the assessee is not satisfactory, then the sum so credited may be charged to income