INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARMER vs. PUSHP RAJ BOHRA, JALORE

The appeal of the revenue is allowed, in the manner discussed as above

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Bleito, Ward-1, Barmer. Vs. Pushp Raj Bohra, M-09, Shivaji Nagar, Jalore - 343001. Pan No. Aanpb4456C Assessee By Shri Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Revenue By Smt. Runi Pal, Cit (D.R.) Date Of Hearing 29.04.2025. Date Of Pronouncement 01.03.2025. Order Per Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Id. National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac/Cit(A)], Delhi Dated 08.02.2024 In Respect Of Assessment Year: 2017-18 Where The Department Has Raised Following Grounds: 1. Whether The Id. Cit(A) Is Justified In Facts & Law In Directing To Treat The Income From The Sale Of Immovable Properties As Capital Gains Instead Of Business Income, By Ignoring The Fact That Assesse & His Business Concerns Are Engaged In The Business Of Property & Real Estate Development & Huge Expenses Of Rs. 8.72 Cr. Were Incurred By Assessee On Development Of Projects To Earn Profit. 2. Whether The Id. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts By Directing The Ao To Treat The Income From The Sale Of Immovable Properties As Income From Capital Gains Instead Of Business Income By Merely Following The Order Of Hon'Ble

250. 4. That the tax effect involved in this case is above the limit laid down in Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the CBDT, (Judicial Section) New Delhi." 2. The sole issue challenged by the revenue is that the CIT (A)/NFAC was not justified in treatment of the income from the sale of immovable properties as capital

MAHENDRA RATHI,BIKANER vs. ITO, BIKANER

Capital Gains Tax on sale of Land. The Case Law relied by\nthe AR of the assessee that of Amritsar Bench in the case Lateef Ahmad Gujree\nVs. ITO in I.T.A. No. 24/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2010-11 dated 04.06.2024 and\nother Benches are distinguishable on peculiar facts of the present case.\n5. In is settled law that at the stage

ASHOK PANWAR HUF,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assesses ITA No

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for brevity, the "Act"] for the Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16, date of orders 20/12/2023 and 17/07/2023, respectively. The impugned orders emanated from the order of the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3, Jodhpur [for brevity, the "Ld. AO"] passed under section 143(3) of the Act, date of orders

RACHNA GOYAL,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee\nhas raised the following grounds of appeal :-\n“1.The CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without\nconsidering the grounds of the assessee regarding reopening of assessment.\n2. The CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without\ndiscussing and considering

MARBLE KINGDOM INDIA PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO,WARD-TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteassessment Year : 2013-14 Marble Kingdom India Private Income Tax Officer, 365, Lodha Complex, Shashtri Vs Ward-Tds, Circle, Udaipur Udaipur Pan: Jdhm06807D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Ms. Prerana Choudhary-Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.08.2023 Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi) Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y. 2013-14 Emanating From Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 31.12.2019 Passed By Income Tax Officer (Tds), Udaipur. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Application Under Section 154 Of The Act Against The Order Under Section 200A. Assessee Requested The Ito To Rectify The Levy Of Fee Charged Under Section 234E Of The Act. The Ld. Ito Rejected The Application On The Ground That It Is Not A Mistake Apparent From Record As It Is A Debatable Issue. The Relevant Paragraph Of The Order Is Reproduced Here As Under:- Marble Kingdom India Pvt. Ltd. “3. On-Going Through The Record It Is Noticed That It Is Not A Mistake Apparent On Record & Issue Is Debatable & Also Not Covered U/S 154 Of The Act. Thus The Contention Of The Deductor/Assessee Is Not Tenable Because The Hon'Ble Jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Has Dismissed The Appeals In The Case Of M/S Dundlod Shikdhan Sansthan & Anr. V/S Union Of India & Ors. In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8672/2014 Dated 28.07.2015 On This Issue. Hence Considering The Facts Of The Case & Decision Of Jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court The Application Filed By The Assessee U/S 154 Is Rejected Accordingly.”

250 of the Act 1. 31.12.2020 06.01.2021 No Response 2. 09.07.2021 19.07.2021 No Response 3. 26.11.2021 13.12.2021 No Response 4. 07.01.2022 28.01.2022 No Response 5. 23.02.2022 09.03.2022 No Response 6.1 Thus, ld. CIT(A) had issued five notices and assessee failed to submit reply to the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we are of the opinion that sufficient opportunity had been

NARAYANI BAI DANGI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.42/Jodh/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2016-17. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Udaipur,[in brevity ‘the AO’] order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following ground: I.T.A. No.42/Jodh/2022 2 Assessment Year

CHHITAR MAL JAIN ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in brevity the Act) for assessment year 2019-20. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the CPC, Bengaluru, (in brevity the ld. AO) order passed u/s 154/143(1) of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds: I.T.A. No. 113/Jodh/2022 2 Assessment Year

SURENDRA KUMAR MATHUR,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JODHPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalsurendra Kumar Mathur, Vs. I.T.O., Kuldip Vihar, Pal Road, Ward 3(1) Jodhpur. Jodhpur. Pan No. Akbpm 1606 K Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari Ca & Shri Abhinav Kothari Ca Revenue By Shri K.C. Badhok, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 06.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2021 O R D E R Per Bench : This Is The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jodhpur Dated 16/07/2018 For The A.Y. 2012-13, Wherein The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Partly Not Allowing Deduction For Cost Of Improvement Incurred In Fy 1991-92 At 2,12,500/- Out Of Total Claim Of Rs. 8,50,000/-. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Further Erred In Partly Not Allowing Deduction For Cost Of Improvement Incurred In Fy 2001-02 At 1,06,250/- Out Of Total Claim Of Rs. 4,25,000/-. 3. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Sustaining The Addition Of Rs. 3,35,554/- On Account Of Fair Market Value U/S 50C Of The Act. The Declared Sale Consideration Deserved To Be Taken For Computing Long Term Gain.

250/- sustained in F.Y. 2001-02. 4 ITA 426 /Jodh/2018 Surendra Kumar Mathur Vs ITO 6. In ground no. 3 of appeal, the assessee had challenged the substitution of sale consideration by invoking section 50C and making addition of Rs. 3,35,554/-. The AO had taken the fair market value of the property

AMRINDER SINGH JOSAN,SRI GANGANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-3,, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, the appeal bearing ITA 492/Jodh/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2011-12. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward -3, Sriganga Nagar,[in brevity ‘the AO’] order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following ground: I.T.A.No. 492/Jodh/2023 2 &S.A.No.10/Jodh/2023 “1. That

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The grounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under :- Ashiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. In ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 “Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the I.T. Act,1961 dated

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

250 of the I.T.\nAct, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The\ngrounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under\n:-\n2\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14\n“Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

250 of the I.T.\nAct, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The\ngrounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under\n:- \n2\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14\n“Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDIAPUR, UDAIPUE

250 of the I.T.\nAct, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The\ngrounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under\n:-2\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14\n“Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s

SUBHASH CHAND JAIN ,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

capital gain. The on the other hand the Ld DR has relied on DVO report and order of ld CIT (A). 14. The AR of the assessee has also drawn our attention towards the fact that the AO has not referred the matter to DVO, infect in the instant case referred the matter

SUBHASH CHAND JAIN ,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

capital gain. The on the other hand the Ld DR has relied on DVO report and order of ld CIT (A). 14. The AR of the assessee has also drawn our attention towards the fact that the AO has not referred the matter to DVO, infect in the instant case referred the matter

SHRINATH PRODUCTS,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripotem/S Shrinath Products Vs. Ito. Ward 1(1), A.M.Mehta & Co, Udaipur, 6-B, Bapu Bazar, Rajasthan. Udaipur.-313001, Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Aaqfs9840Q Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair. Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Cit(A)-1,Udaipur Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax (Act), 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

6-B, Bapu Bazar, Rajasthan. Udaipur.-313001, Rajasthan. PAN/GIR No. : AAQFS9840Q Appellant .. Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Nidhi Nair. JCIT-DR Date of Hearing 07.08.2023 Date of Pronouncement 07.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BIKANER vs. SMT. ALPANA GUPTA, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwala.C.I.T. Vs. Smt. Alpana Gupta, 4-A-15, Central Circle, Jawahar Nagar, Bikaner. Sriganganagar. Pan No. Aiepg 8893 R

250/-. Search and seizure proceedings were conducted at the residential and business premises of ‘Gupta group of Sri Ganganagar & Bikaner’ on 11.08.2016. Notices were issued and assessee filed her reply. The A.O. after making detailed enquiry and verification passed assessment order on 20/12/2018 assessing total income of the assessee at Rs. 3,39,63,530/- by making various disallowances

SHRI KHERAJ RAM ,BARMER vs. DC CEN CIR01, JODHPUR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity the Act] for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15. The impugned orders were emanated from the order of I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 114/Jodh/2023 2 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2014-15 the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur, (in brevity the AO) order passed