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

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

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

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

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

seizure”. Both these provisions, therefore,\nhave to be read together. Section 153A is indeed an extremely potent power\nwhich enables the Revenue to reopen at least six years of preceding assessment\nyear of search. It is not to be exercised lightly. It is only if during the course of\nsearch under section 132, incriminating material justifying the reopening

ARUN PALAWAT,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL),, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if, in the opinion of the Principal [Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal] Commissioner or Commissioner,— (a) the order is passed without making inquiries or verification which should have been made

ZARI SILK (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

Transfer Pricing Officer, as the case may be,] shall be deemed to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, if, in the opinion of the Principal [Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner or Principal] Commissioner or Commissioner,— (a) the order is passed without making inquiries or verification which should have been made

SHRI MADHO LAL SAINI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessees are allowed

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

seizure operation conducted at the premises of Rock Land Group of Cases and the documents related to the assessee found during the course of search were made available to the Assessing Officer of the present assessee. We thus respectfully following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT in the case of ACIT vs. Arun Kapur

KAILASH CHAND MAHESHWARI,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

search enquiries and during the assessment proceedings and even the return of income was not filed by the appellant. The assessment order had to be passed as per the above judgement. No application for filing and admission of additional evidences has been filed by the appellant along with any justification etc. The issue raised by the appellant regarding the contention

SHRI KHANDELWAL DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Him On The Reason Of Issuing Notice U/S 148 On Borrowed Satisfaction Of Another Wing Of The Department.

transferred through the bank account does not prove that the money is explained. The appellant has submitted that Shri Bhanwar Lal Jain or any of the person whose statements were being relied upon by the Id. AO, was neither prop nor partner/director in alleged bogus concerns and all such parties had given their confirmations about selling the goods

SHRI KHANDELWAL DIAMONDS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

transferred through the bank account does not prove that the money is explained. The appellant has submitted that Sh. Bhanwar Lal Jain or any of the person whose statements were being relied upon by the Id. AO, was neither prop nor partner/director in alleged bogus concerns and all such parties had given their confirmations about selling the goods

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S RIGID CONDUCTORS (RAJ.) PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

transfer of capital asset. Also section 45(5) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is related to capital gain in case of compulsory acquisition of land which is applicable in this case. Hence, the assessee’s theory of ‘shifting of land’ is nowhere described nor application in case in view of the facts as narrated above. 2. The compensation received

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S CHOKHI DHANI DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

transfer of capital asset. Also section 45(5) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is related to capital gain in case of compulsory acquisition of land which is applicable in this case. Hence, the assessee’s theory of ‘shifting of land’ is nowhere described nor application in case in view of the facts as narrated above. 2. The compensation received

DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX, LIC BUILDING vs. M/S GEE VEE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

transfer of capital asset. Also section 45(5) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is related to capital gain in case of compulsory acquisition of land which is applicable in this case. Hence, the assessee’s theory of ‘shifting of land’ is nowhere described nor application in case in view of the facts as narrated above. 2. The compensation received

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S VISION ESTATES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

transfer of capital asset. Also section 45(5) of the I.T.Act, 1961 is related to capital gain in case of compulsory acquisition of land which is applicable in this case. Hence, the assessee’s theory of ‘shifting of land’ is nowhere described nor application in case in view of the facts as narrated above. 2. The compensation received

ANSHU SAHAI (HUF),JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CENTRAL CIRCLE

seizure action takes place in last week of March 2021 \nand the seized material is transferred by the AO of the search the assessee to the \nAO of the other assessee in the month of April 2021 apparently in the case of the \nother person on the date of search would be treated as April 2021 going by the \ninterpretation

VIRENDRA SINGH RATNAWAT,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

transferred out of unexplained money and thus the same is liable to be taxed in terms of the provisions of section 69A of the Act.” As per above particulars of the whatsapp message, it was for US $ 21051 equivalent to Indian currency amounting to Rs. 10.31 lacs i.e. only for one transaction and not of two as interpreted

VIRENDRA SINGH RATNAWAT,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

transferred out of unexplained money and thus the same is liable to be taxed in terms of the provisions of section 69A of the Act.” As per above particulars of the whatsapp message, it was for US $ 21051 equivalent to Indian currency amounting to Rs. 10.31 lacs i.e. only for one transaction and not of two as interpreted

VIRENDRA SINGH RATNAWAT,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

transferred out of unexplained money and thus the same is liable to be taxed in terms of the provisions of section 69A of the Act.” As per above particulars of the whatsapp message, it was for US $ 21051 equivalent to Indian currency amounting to Rs. 10.31 lacs i.e. only for one transaction and not of two as interpreted

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

seizure operation conducted at the premises of rock land group of cases and the documents related to the assessee found during the course of search were made available to the Assessing officer of the present Assessee. We thus respectfully following the decision of co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in the case of the ACIT vs Arun Kumar