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)

ii) any audit objection to the effect that the assessment in the case of the assessee for the relevant assessment year has not been made in accordance with the provisions of this Act, of 2024: GUJHC: 54567-DB (iii) any information received under an agreement referred to in Section 90 or Section

SHANKAR LAL LUDHANI THROUGH LATA DEVI LUDHANI AS LEGAL HEIR,AJMER vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

68, section 69, section 69A, section 69B, section 69C or section 69D, if such income is not covered under clause (a), the income-tax payable shall be the aggregate of— (i) the amount of income-tax calculated on the income referred to in clause (a) and clause (b), at the rate of sixty per cent

SUWALKA AND SUWALKA PROPERTIES AND BUILDERS PVT LTD,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, KOTA, KOTA, RAJASTHAN

Bench: Him Challenging The 2 Suwalka & Suwalka Properties & Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Acit Assessment Order Dated 22.12.2019 Passed U/S.143(3)Of The Income Tax

68 but it should have been made u/s 69A of Income Tax Act, 1961 then the jurisdiction of CIT (A) in limited to deciding the matter whether the addition u/s 69A is correct or not. In the appellate proceeding the addition cannot be confirmed by applying all together different section by invoking a section for which satisfaction

SHREE DURGA JEWELLERS,JAWAHAR NAGAR JAIPUR vs. AO CIRCLE 4 JAIPUR, CR BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

6. We also note that the provisions of section 68 cannot be appliedin relation to\nthe sales receipt shown by the assessee in its books ofaccounts. It is because the\nsales receipt has already been shown in thebooks of accounts as income at the\ntime of sale only.\n9. 7. We are also aware of the fact that there

MAHESH KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT ,CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

68, Section 69, Section 69A, Section 69B, Section 69C or Section 69D, at the rate of 30% (plus surcharge and cess), without allowing any deduction for any expenditure or allowance. 4.25. Thereafter, the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 115BBE were substituted by Taxation Laws (Second Amendment) Act, 2016, w.e.f

GEETA DEVI AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ITO WD 1(4), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 450/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Badri Lal Agarwal through Legal heir Smt. Geeta Devi G-5, Shyama Residency, Plot No. 7, Purander Ji Ka Bag Moti Doongri Road, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: ALGPA5194C अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by: Sh. S. B. Natani, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT सुनवाई की तारीख /

6,45,810/- surrendered by the assessee in revised computation with revised return of income as undisclosed income of the assessee under section 68 of the IT Act 1961 and applied the provisions of section 115BBE for rate of tax purposes. It is submitted that the learned AO has not brought any material on record to controvert that

SURENDRA PAL SINGH SAHNI,KOTA vs. ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

6,45,810/- surrendered by the assessee in revised computation with revised return of income as undisclosed income of the assessee under section 68 of the IT Act 1961 and applied the provisions of section 115BBE for rate of tax purposes. It is submitted that the learned AO has not brought any material on record to controvert that

PEEYUSH AGARWAL,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result Ground and 1 and 2 raised by the assessee are allowed

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

6,00,000/­ as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and confirmed the addition. Section 68 of the Act deals with "unexplained Credit" in the books of the assessee and section 69A of the Act deals with 37 Peeyush Agarwal, Jaipur. "unexplained money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article". Both are entirely different. Though

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

68. [Russian Technology Center (P.) Ltd. 2013 Taxmann.com 400 (Delhi-Trib)] 2.8. Mere inadequacy of an enquiry or insufficiency of material on record can be a ground to invoke powers under Section 263. Under identical set of facts, 22 Shri Kalyan Buildmart Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Pr. CIT-2, Jaipur [2021] 214 TTJ (Chd.) 908, jurisdiction under Section

ABHAY CHORDIA,JAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

6: 1. The provisions of Section 115BBE were inserted in the ITA by Finance Act, 2012, with effect from 1.04.2013. Section 115BBE taxed the unexplained credits, Money, investment, expenditure, etc., which were deemed as income under Section 68, Section 69, Section 69A, Section 69B, Section 69C or Section 69D, at the rate

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

section 12AA as a charitable entity undertaking educational activity and thus qualify as an eligible entity for receiving contributions from the assessee society. The contribution of Rs 3,86,84,912 is made by the assessee society out of income generated during the year under consideration as apparent from the return of income and computation of income available

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

68 of Income 7000000 7000000 0 Tax Act, 1961 on account of alleged bogus share capital introduced through Kolkata based companies 5. Disallowance of expenses 5516 5516 0 naming bill premium 6. Disallowance 15% of total 166336 166336 0 expenses of Rs. 11,08,906/- (After reducing Rs. 54,57,098/- already disallowed u/s 40(A)(3

SANJAY LUNIA,AJMER vs. ITO WD-2(1), AJMER

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

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

3 Sanjay Lunia vs.ITO declared income. The case was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS for the reason of 'Cash deposit’ during demonetization period". A notice u/s 143 (2) of Income tax Act, 1961 was issued on 22.09.2018 fixing the case for hearing on 27.09.2019 which was duly served upon the assessee on 22.09.2019 through e-mail. In compliance

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. The assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered is not satisfactory. 5.3 Before comments are made on the action by the ld. assessing officer vis- a-vis facts of the case it would be worthwhile to discuss general principle relating to section 68 and what constitute books of accounts

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. The assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered is not satisfactory. 5.3 Before comments are made on the action by the ld. assessing officer vis- a-vis facts of the case it would be worthwhile to discuss general principle relating to section 68 and what constitute books of accounts

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. The assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered is not satisfactory. 5.3 Before comments are made on the action by the ld. assessing officer vis- a-vis facts of the case it would be worthwhile to discuss general principle relating to section 68 and what constitute books of accounts

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

3. The assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source thereof or the explanation offered is not satisfactory. 5.3 Before comments are made on the action by the ld. assessing officer vis- a-vis facts of the case it would be worthwhile to discuss general principle relating to section 68 and what constitute books of accounts

JITENDRA KUMAR TAHILRAMANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, JAIPUR., JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

3) of the Act and rejected the book results. As regards the contention of the assessee for verification of the sales by invoking the provision of section 133(6) [ calling for any information from any person or any officer ] , section 131 [ Summons enforcing attendance of any person or any officer and examine him on oath ] and Section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

ii) that by virtue of the Amendment introduced by Finance Act (No.2) 2009, the distinction between a contractor and a subcontractor has been done away with and Cl. (Hi) of Explanation under 194C(7) now clarifies that "contract" shall include subcontract; (iii) subject to compliance with the provisions of Section 194C(6), immunity from TDS under sec. 194C