The ITAT Jaipur ruling in the case of Alok Vijawat vs. PCIT discusses the invocation of Section 263 for the 2019-20 assessment and challenges raised against it.
ITAT Jaipur remanded the matter back to the file of AO since ex-parte order was passed due to non-appearance/ non-furnishing of response since assessee died during pendency of the proceedings.
ITAT Jaipur held that time limit of filling the application for recognition u/s. 80G of the Act has been extended by the Board. Accordingly, benefit extension provided and matter restored to file of CIT(E).
ITAT Jaipur held that disallowance of contribution of EPF/ESI of employees contribution justified since amount deposited beyond the due date of respective Acts. Notably, deduction is not allowance even if contribution is deposited before filing of return u/s. 139(1).
ITAT Jaipur dismisses appeal in Kavita Samtani Vs DCIT, upholding additions under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act for unexplained credits.
ITAT partially allows appeal, ruling that unsupported statements without corroborative evidence are insufficient for additions under Section 68. Key judicial observations.
ITAT Jaipur upheld income additions in Kavita Samtani vs. DCIT due to undisclosed cash investments under Section 69 and questioned documentation on financial sources.
In Kavita Samtani vs. DCIT, ITAT Jaipur sets aside additions made under Section 69. The appeal challenges the assessment order for unexplained investments.
Jaipur ITAT rules on Vinaya Sharma’s agricultural land sale dispute, determining its taxability under the definition of capital assets in Section 2(14) of the IT Act.
ITAT Jaipur upheld CIT(A)’s decision to add undisclosed income under Sec 50C in the case of Kavita Samtani Vs DCIT, relating to discrepancies in reported property sale value.
