CHAMELI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR
26. In view of the above discussion and findings, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order is set aside in the manner indicated above, while modifying the first mentioned addition of Rs
ITA 1244/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Oct 2025AY 2012-13
Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)
For Appellant: Sh. P.C. Parwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 131Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 69ASection 80C
80C of the Act, due to the reason that the assessee had failed to support the claim regarding deductions in respect of certain FDRs.
Another addition of Rs. 2,04,256/- also came to be made by the Assessing Officer due to unexplained investment in certain other FDRs.
Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed
2. When the matter came