ARGUS GOLDEN TRADES INDIA LTD.,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

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

68 ITD 1 (PAT.) 1. Penalty u/s 272A(2)(c) Penalty u/s 272A(2)(k) • 2. In the case mentioned above two In the case of Assessee the tax was major issues were addressed: deducted and deposited with the Government well before show • Firstly the assessee had not cause notice. deducted TDS u.s 194 C • The Statement of Return under

MUJMMEEL ,KOTA vs. ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE , KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM The present appeal has been filed because the assessee is dissatisfied with the order of learned Principle Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Jaipur [ for short PCIT ], which was passed on 26-03-2024 as per provision of section 263 of the Income Tax Act [ for short Act]. That order relates

MANPHOOL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Appeal Hearing.”

k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, A.M. This appeal is filed by the assessee aggrieved from the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Here in after referred as (NFAC)] for the assessment year 2014-15 dated 19.10.2023, which in turn arises from the order passed by the AO under Section 271B of the Income

SILVER WINGS LIFE SPACES,KOTA vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1 KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Learned Cit(A), Which Appeal Was Filed By The Assessee

k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM Present appeal has been filed because the assessee is feeling aggrieved by an order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhidated 31/03/2024 [here in after (NFAC)/ Ld. CIT(A)]. It has arisen from the impugned order passed while dismissing first appeal by the assessee before Learned CIT(A), which appeal was filed

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRATEEK KOTHARI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hon’Ble High Court.”

k) As regarding to disallowance of interest paid to M/s Mehul Gems Pvt. Ltd Rs. 8,10,000/- and M/s Ankita Exports Rs. 1,04,301/- this is to submit that the loan from M/s Mehul Gems Pvt. Ltd was taken in AY 2012-13 and in appeals the same has been accepted as genuine, therefore no interest on such

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)

k@ORDER PER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M. These are two appeals filed by the assessee against two separate orders of ld. CIT (A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi dated 24.03.2025 passed under section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2017-18 and 18- 19. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal

JAGDISH KUMAR ARORA,BHAWANIMANDI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM The present appeal has been filed because the assessee is dissatisfied with the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), Jaipur-4 dated 04/09/2024 [ for short CIT(A) ] for assessment year 2017- 18. The said order of the ld. CIT(A) arise as assessee had challenged the order dated 25.12.2019 passed

SHANKAR JHALANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

k@ ORDER PER: BHAGCHAND, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee emanates from the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I Jaipur dated 30/09/2016 for the A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of precious and semi precious stones. The return of income was e-filed by the assessee on 30/09/2011 declaring total income

SHRI SOHAN NATH,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AJMER

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

k@ ORDER PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 14.08.2017 of the ld. CIT(A), Ajmer arising from penalty order passed U/s 271B of the I.T. Act for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- “1. The impugned penalty order u/s 271B of the Act dated

SHRI RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE-1, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

272A having been initiated after a period of more than 6 years were barred by limitation, and also by the 20 Shri Ram Kishan Verma, Kota. decision of Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajinder Kumar Somani (supra), which had been followed by the Tribunal in the case of Noble Pictures (supra).” In the case in hand

ANSHU SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is hereby allowed

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

k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal is filed by assessee and is arising out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 13/01/2023 [here in after (NFAC)] for assessment year 2017-18, which in turn arise from the order of the ITO Ward 3(5), Jaipur dated 16.12.2019 passed under

MANEESH JOSHI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD, DAUSA, DAUSA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM Shri Maneesh Joshi आयकरअपीलसं. / ITA. No. 613/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears : 2018-19 बनाम | The ITO, Vs. Ward-Dausa Dausa Ward No. 24, Jageer (Rural) Bandikui, Baswa Road, Bandikui, Tehsil: Baswa, Dausa-303 313 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AGFPJ 8810N अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri R.S. Poonia, CA राजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Ojh

k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM The assessee has filed an appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi dated 27-03-2025 [hereinafter referred as “(CIT(A)/NFAC” ] for the assessment years 2018-19 in the matter of Section 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and thus raising

SUNIL KUMAR NAYAK,JHUNJHUNU vs. CIRCLE (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Ld. Ao.

k@ ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM This appeal arise because the assessee is feeling dissatisfied and aggrieved by an order passed by the Assessing Officer which is dated 23.12.2023 passed by Circle (I.T), Jaipur. This order has been passed after incorporating the directions of DRP dated 29.11.2023. 2 Sunil Kumar Nayak vs. Circle 2. In this appeal, the assessee