RADHAKISHAN BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

68 of the Act. In view of above, it is submitted that the assessment order passed is grossly incorrect, based on false assumption and allegation, and without considering the detailed documents submitted during the assessment proceeding the therefore the additions made be directed to be deleted. In addition, ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the considering the material placed

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)

68 with respect to the fresh unsecured loan taken by the appellant with respect to 53 parties out of 70 parties in respect of which the appellant had failed to produce the balance confirmation during assessment proceedings. The Appellant could not do so in- spite of repeated follow-up from the parties from whom the loan was taken directly

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)

293 Taxman 141 (SC)/[2023] 454 ITR 212 (SC) (24-04-2023) as under- "14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A

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)

293 Taxman 141 (SC)/[2023] 454 ITR 212 (SC) (24-04-2023) as under- "14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: i) that in case of search under Section 132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A

RUKMANI JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIR.-4 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Section 68 says that “68. Where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any previous year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to income

BALAJI JEWELLERS ,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CC -4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Section 145(3) then only Fair Income may be estimated which should be based on past results if available, in this matter assesse has a long past history which are undisputable therefore in view of past history estimated profit should be calculated by applying a suitable Net Profit Ratio. Many landmark judgements are supporting this contention as follows

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2), JAIPUR, NCR BUILDING, STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR vs. VASUDEV HEMRAJANI, ARJUN NAGAR, JAIPUR

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cash deposited in assessee's bank account during the year under consideration applying the provisions of section 115BBE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring the fact that the assessee couldn't furnish copy of cash book and other relevant documentary evidences during assessment proceedings. 4. On the facts and circumstances

RAGHAV KUMAR DHOOT,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

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

293 Taxman 312 (SC)/([2023] 453 ITR\n661 (SC)[10-04-2023] as under:-\nIII. Section 234A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Interest, chargeable as\n(Statutory levy) Assessment years 1987-88 to 1989-90-Whether interest\nunder section 234A for default in furnishing return of income is statutory\ninterest leviable and payable and is mandatory

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. GOLDENDUNES HEIGHTS LLP, JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

293 CTR 468 (Rajasthan)[15-07-2016] Section 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Cash credit (Loan) - Assessment

PRIYANKA SURANA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

68 of the Income tax act to the income of the assessee for taxation.’’ 6 MS. PRIYANKA SURANA VS ITO, WARD 5(1), JAIPUR 3.2 Against the order of the AO assessee has filed the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the AO meaning thereby dismissed the appeal of the assesse by observing as under

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

68 on account of unexplained credits and under Section 69C on account of unexplained expenses. Revenue further contended that incriminating documents or materials had been found during the course of the searches and consequently by virtue of Section 153A, AO had to assess the total income of six years under Section 153A. Since the assessments were

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. MOTISONS JEWELLERS LTDL, JAIPUR

section 115BBE of the Act. 4.1. Finding of ld.AO: - The findings and observations of ld. AO are at page 2 to 23 of the assessment order. In view of the observations and findings the ld. AO alleged that the sales made, amount realized from debtors and advances received from customers, which was utilized to deposit in bank account

ITO, WAR-4(1), JAIPUR vs. SHRI AMIT AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

68 of the Act. The Tribunal had applied the principles enunciated by the Apex Court in T.V. Sundariam Iyengar &Sons's case (supra) where the amount which was initially of capital nature but had changed its character to be of revenue nature, it was treated to be taxable income of the assessee. Thus, the amount

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

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

68 on account of unexplained credits and under Section 69C\non account of unexplained expenses. Revenue further contended that\nincriminating documents or materials had been found during the course of the\nsearches and consequently by virtue of Section 153A, AO had to assess the total\nincome of six years under Section 153A. Since the assessments were

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

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

68 on account of unexplained credits and under Section 69C\non account of unexplained expenses. Revenue further contended that\nincriminating documents or materials had been found during the course of the\nsearches and consequently by virtue of Section 153A, AO had to assess the total\nincome of six years under Section 153A. Since the assessments were

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

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

68 on account of unexplained credits and under Section 69C\non account of unexplained expenses. Revenue further contended that\nincriminating documents or materials had been found during the course of the\nsearches and consequently by virtue of Section 153A, AO had to assess the total\nincome of six years under Section 153A. Since the assessments were

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 on\naccount of unexplained credits and under Section 69C on account of\nunexplained expenses. Revenue further contended that incriminating\ndocuments or materials had been found during the course of the\nsearches and consequently by virtue of Section 153A, AO had to\nassess the total income of six years under Section 153A. Since the\nassessments were

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIDHUSHI KOTHARI, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

293 Taxman 141 (SC)/[2023] 454 ITR 212 (SC)[24-04-2023] as under –\n“14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under :-\ni)\nii)\niii)\niv)\nThat in case of search under Section132 or requisition under Section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section

RAJENDRA KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

section 68 of the IT Act. This ground is common as the revenue has also challenged the impugned order of the ld. CIT (A) to the extent of the addition deleted by ld. CIT (A). The ld. A/R of the assessee has submitted that the additions sustained by ld. CIT (A) is based on 25 ITA Nos. 293