SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this ground of appeal

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this ground of appeal

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आंकड़ुठरधारी आइटीएए सं.र@ITA Nos.493, 495 to 498, 500/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष@Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17, 2018-19 to 2020-21 Mahendra Kumar Goyal चुके Vs. ACIT/DCIT Ward No. 2, Shahpura Road Neem Ka Thana, Sikar Central Circle-03, Jaipur लेखा संख्याल्लेय सं.जीआइआर सं.पान@PAN/GIR No.: ACFPG0306G अपीलार्थी@Appellant प्रत्यार्थी@Respondent निर्धारीती की आर से@ Assessee by : Shri P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की आर से@ R

269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this ground of appeal

SH. MAHENDRA KUMAR GOYAL,SIKAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee are disposed off as under

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

269T of the Act by the loanee (who received advance from appellant). The learned AO is directed to examine the 10 ITA Nos. 493. 495 to 498/JP/2025 Sh. Mahendra Kumar Goyal same from the perspective of penalty u/s 271D and 271E of the Act and make a reference to the Jt. Commissioner/Addl. Commissioner. In the result this ground of appeal

KANHIAYA LAL SAIN,JAIPUR vs. JCIT RANGE-7 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the Appeals of the appellant stands allowed with no orders as to costs

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

transfer of money from one family members to another family members to support him during medical emergency period and such transaction could not be treated as loan or advance and transaction falling under ambit of s. 269SS attracting penalty u/s 271D—Therefore, penalty imposed by AO and confirmed by CIT(A) needs to be deleted—Assessee’s appeal allowed

MUKESH KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

269T of the Act by receiving unsecured loans in cash and payment thereof in cash. According to the AO, the assesse failed to explain the sources of cash deposit of Rs.2,60,000/- because before taking unsecured loans the income of the borrower should be considered whether he has income for repayment of unsecured loans. According

M/S MORANI CARS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD-6, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

269T. Your honour Apex Court in case of Shreelekha Benerjee v. CIT 49 ITR 112 (SC) held that before the department rejects such evidence, it 12 M/s Morani Cars Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-06, Jaipur must either show an inherent weakness in the explanation or rebut it by putting to the assessee some information or evidence which