Shri Rajesh Chunara Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) On perusal of the AIR information, it is noted that the information talks about the assessee and another person by name of Ashok K Chanara, name of the bank which has issued the credit card, the transaction amount of Rs 3,82,079/- and date of transaction i.e, 31.03.2008. The […]
Rameshwar Prasad Shringi Vs PCIT (ITAT Jaipur) Assessing officer has carried out exhaustive enquiries and verifications regarding source of cash deposits in the bank account during the financial year relevant to impugned assessment year. The bank statements, the cash book, the ledger accounts, the financial statements for the year under consideration and for the earlier […]
Bansiwala Iron & Steel Rolling Mills Vs DCIT (ITAT Jaipur) Since the A.O. is a quasi-judicial authority, who has to collect the evidences, material and then to adjudicate the matter after due and complete application of mind. The A.O. expected to record his own satisfaction before reaching to any conclusion. In our view, the A.O. […]
ITAT Jaipur: Challenge against PCIT invoking Section 263 for large share premium. AO’s proper examination defended. Grounds and merits discussed.
Naina Saraf Vs PCIT (ITAT Jaipur) Section 56(2)(vii)(b)(ii) cannot be applied prior to a A.Y. 2014-15 as section comes into effect from A.Y. 2015-16 The Finance Act, 2013 inserted clause (ii) in S. 56(2)(vii)(b) reading as under: ‘(ii) for a consideration which is less than the stamp duty value of the property by an amount […]
Sanjay Matai Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) From perusal of record, we observed that Section 254 of the Act read with Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 states about power to admit additional evidences, whether mere fact that evidence sought to be produced is vital and important does not provide a substantial […]
Mohan Lal Vs JCIT (ITAT Jaipur) Magistrate had convicted the assessee on the complaint filed U/s 138 of the N.I. Act by Shri Aditya Kumar Sharma but that does not ipso facto mean that assessee has taken or accepted any loan or deposit or any specified sum in cash from the said Aditya Kumar Sharma. […]
Merely saying that `loan had been advanced’ or `ITR had not been filed’, without disclosing the reasons, which led AO to hold such a belief , did not confer valid jurisdiction on the AO to take action u/s 147 and 148.
Devender Kaur Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) In the instant case also, the AO has failed to conduct any enquiry and bring any material or fact to establish that the assessee has initially acquired the property in question at the time of Power of Attorney dated 3.1.2008 and subsequently sold the same vide sale deed dated 23.09.2009 […]
Narendra Kumar Khandelwal Vs ITO (ITAT Jaipur) We have considered the rival contentions and carefully perused the material available on record as well as order passed by the Tribunal in the main appeal. From the record, we found that the Tribunal vide consolidated order dated 18/12/2015 had dismissed the appeals of the Revenue as well […]
