Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 34 (1.32 seconds)
Documents citing Pankaj Bansal, Gurgaon vs Pr,Cit (Central), Gurgaon on 31 May, 2021

Anand Kumar Bansal,Bilaspur vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 13 November, 2025

7. That on perusal of the order of the Pr. CIT u/s. 263 of the Act, it is discernable that the revenue is aggrieved on two counts. Viz. (i) the omission of the A.O to consider relevant facts regarding the assessee which has been brought out in the order passed u/s.263 of the Act by the Pr. CIT which led to escapement of income of Rs.7,54,202/- and (ii) resultant under levy of tax of Rs.2,26,529/- and consequential interest u/s. 234A & 234B of the Act of Rs.27,183/- and Rs.2,44,651/- respectively causing thereby under levy of aggregate tax and interest of Rs.2,71,835/-. In these two areas, we find that there is no discussion by the A.O in the assessment order nor any enquiry has been conducted. That going through the assessment order, it is absolutely clear that such assessment has been done in a summary manner accepting the return income as well as the reply of the assessee. That on plain reading of Section 263 of the Act a/w. Explanation-2 of the said provision of the Act, since the assessment order has been passed without making inquiries or verification and the order is passed allowing relief without inquiring into the claim and also considering the deeming nature in Explanation-2, the assessment order, therefore, is erroneous in so far it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. That clearly the facts were not considered by the A.O as brought on record by 14 Anand Kumar Bansal Vs. Pr. CIT, Raipur-1 ITA No.133/RPR/2025 the Pr. CIT in his order observing the assessment order therefore to be erroneous so as to be prejudicial to the interest of the revenue.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Raipur Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Solitare World Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs Acit, Central Circle- 25, New Delhi on 31 May, 2022

The Hon'ble Supre me Court in the case of Sushil Bansal Vs. PCIT 115 taxmann.com 226 (SC) which uphe ld [ 2020] 115 axmann.com 225 (Delhi) HIGH COURT OF DELHI in S ushil Bansal vs. PCIT wherein it was state d "1. This Court is unable to agree with the above submissions. The Court finds that the AO has taken pains to summon Shri Bhati, the father- in-law of the Assessee and record his statement. Unfortunately, the statement made by the Assessee's father- in-law was not helpful in explaining the source of payment o f Rs. 2.3 lacs as capitation fees. Shri Bhati only explaine d the payment o f Rs.7.18 lacs as regular fees. With there be ing no credible explanation offered by the Assessee for the payment made as capitatio n fee, the AO is justifie d in adding it to the Assessee's income."
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi Cites 29 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Sadhwani Wood Product Private Limited , ... vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 16 October, 2024

Index Sno. Particulars Pages 1 Copy of Show Cause Notice dated 12.03.2024 issued by the Principal 01-02 Commissioner of Income-tax u/s. 263 of the Act 2 Copy of Reply dated 16.03.2024 submitted by the 03-23 assessee in response to notice issued u/s. 263 of the Act 3 Copy of assessment order dated 29.09.2021 passed by the Assessing 24-207 Officer for A.Y. 2018-2019 4 Copy of assessment order dated 29.09.2021 passed by the Assessing 208-401 Officer for A.Y. 2020-2021 5 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 402-433 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 6 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 434-444 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 41 ITA Nos. 922 & 398/JP/2024 Sadhwani Wood Products Private Ltd. vs. PCIT 7 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 445-459 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 8 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 460-466 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 9 Hon'ble Supreme Court in Radha Soami Satsang v. CIT (1991) 11 TMI 2 467-473 10 Hon'ble Jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. 474-476 Manna Trust (2022) 1 TMI 693 11 Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in PCIT v. Dharti Estate (2024) 1 TMI 1197 477-481 12 Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in PCIT v. Krishna Kumar Verma 482-486 (2024) 3 TMI 1018 13 Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT Jaipur Bench in Gayatri Devi v. PCIT (2023) 487-520 10 TMI 23 14 Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Tarlochan Singh v. DCIT (2024) 1 TMI 521-537 795 15 Hon'ble ITAT Amritsar Bench in Deepak Setia v. DCIT (2023) 9 TMI 942 538-541 16 Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Parmod Singla v. ACIT (2023) 8 TMI 542-559 525 17 Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Ravinder Kumar Bansal v. PCIT 560-582 (2023) 12 TMI 716 18 Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT Jaipur Bench in Rekha 583-599 Shekhawat v. PCIT (2022) 8 TMI 791 19 Hon'ble ITAT Rajkot Bench in Vaidya Realities v. PCIT (2024) 1 TMI 970 600-609 42 ITA Nos.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 49 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Pink City Jewel House Private Limited ... vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax ... on 26 December, 2024

and not under the head income from other sources. This view has also been taken by Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in PCIT v. Dharti Estate (2024) 1 TMI 1197, Co-ordinate bench of Jaipur Bench in Gayatri Devi v. PCIT (2023) 10 TMI 23, Chandigarh Bench in Ravinder Kumar Bansal v. PCIT (2023) 12 TMI 716, ITAT, Rajkot Bench in Vaidya Realities v. PCIT (2024) 1 TMI 970 and other decisions cited in the written submission. Thus, ground no. 3 raised by the assessee-appellant has also merit.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 48 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sadhwani Wood Product Private Ltd , Kota vs Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, ... on 16 October, 2024

Index Sno. Particulars Pages 1 Copy of Show Cause Notice dated 12.03.2024 issued by the Principal 01-02 Commissioner of Income-tax u/s. 263 of the Act 2 Copy of Reply dated 16.03.2024 submitted by the 03-23 assessee in response to notice issued u/s. 263 of the Act 3 Copy of assessment order dated 29.09.2021 passed by the Assessing 24-207 Officer for A.Y. 2018-2019 4 Copy of assessment order dated 29.09.2021 passed by the Assessing 208-401 Officer for A.Y. 2020-2021 5 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 402-433 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 6 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 434-444 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 41 ITA Nos. 922 & 398/JP/2024 Sadhwani Wood Products Private Ltd. vs. PCIT 7 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 445-459 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 8 Copy of letter dated 17.09.2021 submitted by the 460-466 assessee during the course of search assessment proceedings before the Assessing Officer 9 Hon'ble Supreme Court in Radha Soami Satsang v. CIT (1991) 11 TMI 2 467-473 10 Hon'ble Jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court in PCIT v. 474-476 Manna Trust (2022) 1 TMI 693 11 Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in PCIT v. Dharti Estate (2024) 1 TMI 1197 477-481 12 Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in PCIT v. Krishna Kumar Verma 482-486 (2024) 3 TMI 1018 13 Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT Jaipur Bench in Gayatri Devi v. PCIT (2023) 487-520 10 TMI 23 14 Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Tarlochan Singh v. DCIT (2024) 1 TMI 521-537 795 15 Hon'ble ITAT Amritsar Bench in Deepak Setia v. DCIT (2023) 9 TMI 942 538-541 16 Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Parmod Singla v. ACIT (2023) 8 TMI 542-559 525 17 Hon'ble ITAT Chandigarh Bench in Ravinder Kumar Bansal v. PCIT 560-582 (2023) 12 TMI 716 18 Hon'ble Jurisdictional ITAT Jaipur Bench in Rekha 583-599 Shekhawat v. PCIT (2022) 8 TMI 791 19 Hon'ble ITAT Rajkot Bench in Vaidya Realities v. PCIT (2024) 1 TMI 970 600-609 42 ITA Nos.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Jaipur Cites 49 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next