SITA DEVI CHOUDHARY,AHORE JALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JALORE

In the result, stands allowed

Bench: The Cit(A) Challenging The Additions Made By The Ao. The Ld.Cit(A) Upheld Both The Additions Made By Observing-

section 68 as under – (28) That another fact is that the H That another fact is that the Hon’ble Commissioner Appeal while passing order on’ble Commissioner Appeal while passing order had duly acknowledged that copies of confirmation of accounts was duly furnished but had duly acknowledged that copies of confirmation of accounts was duly furnished

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2009–10. 2. Since the issues involved in both the above appeals are common and were heard together, therefore, they are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take ITA No. 21/Chd/2018

M/S. SUPER SHIV SHAKTI MINCHEM PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3, , BHILWARA

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Assessee are dismissed

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

144 and 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2009–10. 2. Since the issues involved in both the above appeals are common and were heard together, therefore, they are being disposed off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. We shall take ITA No. 21/Chd/2018

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

MR. NEERAJ PALIWAL,RAJSAMAND vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, all these appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’, for short]. 2. The hearing of the appeals was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. 3. In all these appeals, the assessee has raised certain common grounds of appeal, thus all the appeals were clubbed together, heard

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 144 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order\nqua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as\nADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan,\nIndia, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the\nOfficial Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD. vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 144 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order\nqua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as\nADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan,\nIndia, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the\nOfficial Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 144 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order\nqua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as\nADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan,\nIndia, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the\nOfficial Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

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

section 145 are not found to\nbe relevant in the facts of this case. The AO has not disturbed the book results as the cash\ntransactions are not part of regular books of accounts.\nThe ld CIT(A) has also tried to distinguish the decisions relied upon. Thus on the\nbasis of above observations the ld. CIT(A) confirmed

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

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

section 132 and as per income tax rules 112 for such proceedings. The search party has commenced the search action in absence of any competent person of any of the company mentioned in the search warrant and further search warrant was not signed by any of the competent person. The search warrant was not shown to any competent person

DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDIPUR vs. M/S. U.N. AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

Section 144 as a best judgment assessment owing to the failure on the part of the assessee to file its return of income and getting its books of accounts audited. The gross receipts of Rs.25,54,88,102 are also not in dispute which has been 9 DCIT vs. U.N. Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur- AY: 2013-14 adopted

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. ,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order qua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as ADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan, India, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the Official Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order qua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as ADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan, India, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the Official Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order qua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as ADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan, India, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the Official Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated

ADARSH CREDIT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, invoking provisions of best judgement, an ex-parte order qua the assessee society where the Assessment order indicated the address as ADARSH PRINTER BHAWAN RAJMATA DHARAMSALA, SIROHI 307001, Rajasthan, India, which was seized to be the registered office after appointment of the Official Liquidator. And thus, the order was never communicated