ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR , JODHPUR vs. JODHPUR HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD., JODHPUR

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings and in response to the said\nnotice the appellant filed a return of income and also form 10CCB.\nAt the outset, it is pertinent to note that it is well accepted principle of law\nthat beneficial provisions should be given liberal construction and once the\nassessee has satisfied the conditions laid down for claiming deduction /\nexemption under

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR , JODHPUR vs. JODHPUR HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD., JODHPUR

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

reassessment proceedings and in response to the said\nnotice the appellant filed a return of income and also form 10CCB.\nAt the outset, it is pertinent to note that it is well accepted principle of law\nthat beneficial provisions should be given liberal construction and once the\nassessee has satisfied the conditions laid down for claiming deduction /\nexemption under

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JODHPUR , JODHPUR vs. JODHPUR HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD., JODHPUR

In the result, the revenue appeals in ITA Nos

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

Income-tax Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(DR) submitted that the deduction claimed under section 35AD, has been disallowed by the Id. AO in the reassessment proceedings u/s 148, but the same was allowed by the NFAC/CIT(A) without appreciating the facts. The Ld. CIT (DR) contended that the AO disallowed such claim of the assessee on the ground that

SHRI GOPAL SONI ,BIKANER vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BIKANER

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteshri Gopal Soni Prop Vs. The Acit, Circle – 1 Durga Silver Home Bikaner. Katla Chowk Nokha Rajasthan. Bikaner-334803, Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Aemps5097M Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit -Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 11.08.2023 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), Bikaner Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

business and there was a survey operation u/s 133A of the Act was carried out at the premises of the assessee on 25.02.2014, the survey team found certain discrepancies in the books of accounts of the assessee and incriminating documents were found and the assessee has surrendered a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs as undisclosed income for the year under

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

income may assessee company may not be determined on the basis of the\nactual sales as calculated in the above table for the respective years. In response\nthereto the assessee has filed the detailed reply dated 01.12.2017 available at PB\n71 to 102 with details also reproduced at page 7 to 19 of the assessment order\nthrough which assessee explained

AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AJMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION)/ ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR / JODHPUR

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

Income Tax (2019) 197 TI'J (Del) 889 (DPB 63-80), it was held that: "It is well-settled law that before passing the reassessment order, AO shall have to prepare and serve notice upon the assessee under s. 143(2). The Principal CIT observed that "no formal notice under s. 143(2) has been issued to the assessee". Therefore

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

business, declared in the ITR.\nIn any of the accountancy system, there is no such method of calculating profit. As per\nAO's own records and finding the shares were purchased for Rs. 42,68,762/- and sold the\nsame shares for Rs. 44,10,190/-, with a difference/profit of Rs. 1,41,428/-. This is just\narbitrary, malafide

MURLIDHAR KRIPLANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Completing The Assessment Of Income Which Is Mandatory In Sh. Murlidhar Kriplani Vs. Ito Nature. The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Also Confirmed That Where Return Of Income Filed Beyond Time As Contemplated Under Section 139, It Is Not Necessary On Part Of Ao To Issue Notice U/S 143(2) Which Is Bad In Law & Unjustified & Not Tenable As Per The Hon'Ble Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench In Case Of Ito Vs Kamla Devi Sharma In Db

business and Rs. 4,27,217/- under the head capital gains. Subsequently, the assessee was served with notice under section 148 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act dated 25/03/2015 the assessment was completed under section 148/143(3) vide order dated 09/12/2015. LEGAL POINTS CHALLENGED BY THE ASSESSEE GROUND NO. 1 & 2 -VALIDITY OF REASSESSMENT

MANOJ KUMAR KHUBANI,BARMER vs. DC CEN CIR 2 JDH, JODHPUR

In the result, stands ALLOWED

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

business income. The AO has referred to 3 loose papers while making the addition, whereas an income of Rs.4,10,625/- has already been offered for tax after taking into account all the 37 pages of Ann.- A/1. The expenditure on furniture of Rs.1,25,000/- given to Kishan Lal Suthar stands accounted for in Other income shown

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Business income of Rs. 16,77,283 + Receipt of Rs. 23,401\nu/s 194C). Accordingly, a notice under section 148 dated 08.03.2018 was issued in the name of\nnon-existent firm and not properly served thereon. The said reassessment

MANGILAL DATLA,BANSWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD BANSWARA, BANSWARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, both on legal issue\nas well as on facts

Income Tax Return (ITR) for Assessment Year 2017-18 due to business losses. The Assessing Officer (AO) initiated reassessment proceedings

OCHHAB LAL JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

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

business had no profits but only loss. The Appellate Assistant\nCommissioner accepted this contention, but set aside the assessment and remanded the\ncase to the Income-tax Officer for reassessment

OCHHAB LAL JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

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

business had no profits but only loss. The Appellate Assistant\nCommissioner accepted this contention, but set aside the assessment and remanded the\ncase to the Income-tax Officer for reassessment

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Business income of Rs. 16,77,283 + Receipt of Rs. 23,401\nu/s 194C). Accordingly, a notice under section 148 dated 08.03.2018 was issued in the name of\nnon-existent firm and not properly served thereon. The said reassessment

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Business income of Rs. 16,77,283 + Receipt of Rs. 23,401\nu/s 194C). Accordingly, a notice under section 148 dated 08.03.2018 was issued in the name of\nnon-existent firm and not properly served thereon. The said reassessment

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Business income of Rs. 16,77,283 + Receipt of Rs. 23,401\nu/s 194C). Accordingly, a notice under section 148 dated 08.03.2018 was issued in the name of\nnon-existent firm and not properly served thereon. The said reassessment

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Business income of Rs. 16,77,283 + Receipt of Rs. 23,401\nu/s 194C). Accordingly, a notice under section 148 dated 08.03.2018 was issued in the name of\nnon-existent firm and not properly served thereon. The said reassessment

RAJ KUMAR GOLECHA,PALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR, AAYKAR BHAWAN, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

business premises of\nassessee and his family on 17.12.2015. (AY 2016-17).\nThe impugned order of assessment dated 28.12.2017 passed by the Assessing\nOfficer is wholly incorrect in law as well as facts and circumstances of the case and\nwithout jurisdiction, therefore, the same is liable to be cancelled. The appellant\nrespectfully submits that the observations, findings and/or allegations made

NAHAR COLOURS AND COATINHGS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFINCOMETAX, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

reassess under Section147or pass an order enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund already made or otherwise increasing the liability of the Assessee under Section 154, for any assessment year beginning on or before the 1stdayof April, 2001." 29. Interpreting the said provision in Honda Siel Power Products versusDeputy Commissioner of Income Tax and Another, (2012) 340 ITR 53 (Delhi