BANSI LAL KUMHAR,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

68 on account of cash deposited in\nthe bank account during the year as unexplained money which has been\nconfirmed by the Ld. NFAC/CIT (A). The Ld. AO and CIT(A) both have not\nconsidered the vital facts and material available on record in true perspective\nand sense and thus, the addition so made by the Id. AO and confirmed

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 68 :\n“where any sum is found credited in the books of an assessee maintained for any\nprevious year, and the assessee offers no explanation about the nature and source\nthereof or the explanation offered by him is not, in the opinion of the [Assessing]\nOfficer, satisfactory, the sum so credited may be charged to Income

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

67,077/- under section 68 of the Act to the total income of the assessee. The Ld.AO also calculated

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

Sections 142(2) or 143(2)”.10\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn DCIT Sushil Kumar Jain 134 TTJ 844 (Indore)that “Time-limit of service of notice\nunder s. 143(2) shall also apply in respect of assessments framed under s. 153A and such\ntime limit would start from

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

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Sections 142(2) or 143(2)”.\n10\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn DCIT Sushil Kumar Jain 134 TTJ 844 (Indore)that “Time-limit of service of notice\nunder s. 143(2) shall also apply in respect of assessments framed under s. 153A and such\ntime limit would start from

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 143(3) dated 30.12.2017 in the interest of equity and justice on this ground alone. Ashiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. GOA-3: Addition of Rs. 44,701,826/- in A.Y. 2013-14, Rs.1,64,40,157/- or 5,91,76,693/- in A.Y. 2014-15, Rs.5

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

Sections 142(2) or 143(2)”.\n10\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn DCIT Sushil Kumar Jain 134 TTJ 844 (Indore)that “Time-limit of service of notice\nunder s. 143(2) shall also apply in respect of assessments framed under s. 153A and such\ntime limit would start from

SHRI BHANWAR LAL,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result the appeals of the assessee ITA Nos

67 taxmann.com 357\n(Del), held that\n\"no addition could be made under Section 68 on the basis

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

Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67

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

Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67

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

Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67

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

Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67

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

Section 68 has to fail, for the very reason that as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bhaichand N. Gandhi 13 ITA 07 to 11/Jodh/2021 Neeraj Paliwal Vs ITO (1983) 141 ITR 67

DWARKA JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 68 of the Act. 7. That the petitioner nay kindly be permitted to raise any additional or alternative grounds at or before the time of hearing. 8. The petitioner prays for justice & relief. 2. The sole issue challenged by the assessee in multiple grounds is regarding sustaining the addition of Rs. 67

DCIT, CIRCLE, PALI vs. SHRI BRIJ BHUSHAN GOYAL, FARIDABAD.

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripotedcit Vs. Shri Brij Bhushan Circle, Pali., Goyal, Jodhpur. House No. 331, Sector Rajasthan. 16A, Faridabad, Haryana.-121002 Pan/Gir No. : Aawpg8405D Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Amit Kothari, Ca. Ar Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit -Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 14.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – I, Jodhpur Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

section 80 IC of the Act On perusal of the Financial statements, the Assessing Officer(AO) found that the assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IC(2) of the Act of Rs. 1,68,71,111/- and the Shri brij Bhushan Goyal assessee has filed the detailed explanations on the claim. Whereas the A.O. dealt on the facts and information

BHOOP SINGH POONIA,NOHAR vs. ITO WARD, NOHAR, NOHAR

67,531/- and indirect expenses of Rs. 4,21,933/-. The ld.\nAO has disallowed this claim for want of verification. A perusal\nof the record would indicate that inspite of survey carried out at\nthe premises of the assessee, the ld. AO was unable to pin-point\nas to why direct and indirect expenses are not required for\nearning

ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BIKANER vs. MUKESH SHAH, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Section 2(13) of the IT Act which reads as under: "Business" includes any trading, commerce or manufacture or any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture." The above definition has used the words 'trade' 'commerce' or 'manufacture' or "any adventure or concern in the nature of trade, commerce or manufacture". The Hon'ble Gujarat

PRAKASH CHANDRA JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(1), UDAIPUR

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

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainsh. Prakash Chandra Jain, Vs Income Tax Officer 67-68, Hiran Magri, Sector Ward 1(1), Udaipur No. 08, Udaipur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aavpj 3696 E

67-68, Hiran Magri, Sector Ward 1(1), Udaipur No. 08, Udaipur (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AAVPJ 3696 E Assessee By Shri Shyam Bokdia (CA) Revenue By Shri Venkatesh V. SR. DR (JCIT) Date of hearing 31/10/2022 Date of 04/11/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R PER: B.R. BASKARAN, AM The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated