Rajasthan High Court – taxcaselaw.com

Madras H.C : The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in confirming the levy of penalty of Rs.5,31,800/-under Section 271(i)(c)

High Court Of Madras Magna Credit & Financial Services Limited vs. DCIT Section : 271(1)(c) Asst. Year : 1996-1997 T.S. Sivagnanam & V.Bhavani Subbaroyan, JJ. T.C.(A)No.1522 of 2007 20th September, 2018 Counsel appeared: M/s. Sree Lakshmi Valli for the Petitioner.: Karthik Ranganathan for the Respondent. V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J. 1. The present tax appeal is filed against …

Rajasthan H.C : the learned ITAT has erred in law in confirming the order of CIT(A) in considering the division of the huge chunk of 10-11 bigha agricultural land into smaller portions of agricultural land for easy viability and sale as income from business and profession instead of income under the head capital gains, even when the appellant had inherited the land from his forefathers and had no intention or a previous track record of being into the business of purchase and sale of properties

High Court Of Rajasthan Mahaveer Yadav vs. ITO Section 28 Mohammad Rafiq & Goverdhan Bardhar, JJ. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 238/2018 13th August, 2018 Counsel appeared: Gunjan Pathak for the Petitioner. JUDGEMENT This appeal has been filed by assessee-Mahaveer Yadav challenging the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short-‘ITAT’) dated 27.02.2018 in …

Rajasthan H.C : The assessee has not invested its funds in the modes specified u/s 11(5) of the IT Act, 1961

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT vs. Modern School Society Section 11, 10(23C) Kalpesh Satyendra Jhaveri & Ashok Kumar Gaur, JJ. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 172/2018 31st July, 2018 Counsel appeared: Daksh Pareek for Sameer Jain for the Petitioner JUDGMENT 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the …

Rajasthan H. C : The assessee-company has furnished the detail particulars of the bank accounts, passport, PAN card, addresses and earnings by the shareholder-cum-Director who had invested money in the assessee-company, particularly when the investment was made through banking channel

High Court Of Rajasthan Shreenath Heritage Liquor Pvt Ltd vs. Pr.CIT Section 68, 131, 147, 148 Asst. Year 2011-12 Kalpesh Satyendra Jhaveri & Vijay Kumar Vyas, JJ. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 143/2018 25th July, 2018 Counsel appeared: S.L. Poddar for N.L. Agarwal for the Appellant(s) JUDGMENT By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged …

Rajasthan H.C : the proceedings for reassessment under Section 148/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 were initiated by the ld. Assessing Officer on non-existing facts because ultimately the Assessee has been able to explain that the income which was believed to have escaped assessment was explainable but some other additions were made under the assessment order

High Court Of Rajasthan Prime Chem Oil Limited vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Section 36(1)(viia), 40A(3), 68, 69, 115JA, 115JA(2), 133(6), 143(1), 143(3), 147, 147(1), 147 (a), 148, 148(1), 148(2), 152(2), 153 Asst. Year 1999-2000 and 2000-01 K.S.Jhaveri & Inderjeet Singh, JJ. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 220/2017 & D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 221/2017 …

Rajasthan H.C : Whether the Department can take a contrary view than the circular which has been issued for reduction of arrears in the Supreme Court, High Courts and Tribunals and insist for arguing the matter on merits

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT, JAIPUR-II vs. GAD Fashion Section 268A, 119, 154 and 263 K.S. Jhaveri, M. N. Bhandariand Inderjeet Singh, JJ. D.B. IT Appeal No. 575 Of 2008 November Â 10, 2017Â ORDER K.S. Jhaveri & Inderjeet Singh, JJ. – By way of reference, this Court vide order dated 05.07.2017 framed the following reference for …

Rajasthan H.C : The notice u/s 148 dated 22.03.2010 having been sent through speed post and not having been received back, there was a presumption as to the service of the same ignoring fact

High Court Of Rajasthan Shubhashri Panicker vs. CIT K. S. Jhaveri & Vijay Kumar Vyas, JJ. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 202/2015 Section 148, 142(1) 24th October, 2017 Counsel appeared: Mahendra Gargeiya for the Petitioner.: Anuroop Singhi with Aditya Vijay for the Respondent JUDGMENT 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has assailed the judgment …

Rajasthan H.C : Assessing Authority for non-deduction of tax at source for the amount of discount/commission to the advertising agency under Section 194H

High Court Of Rajasthan Pr.CIT vs. Bhim Sain Garg Through Legal Heir Shailendra Garg K. S. Jhaveri & Vijay Kumar Vyas, JJ. Section 194H, 40(a)(ia) D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 101/2015, 70/2017 11th October, 2017 Counsel appeared: R.B. Mathur with Prateek Kedawat for the Appellant(s) ORDER In both appeals common questions of law and facts are …

Rajasthan H.C : Whether, the tribunal was justified in law in admitting new plea contrary to he facts on record and contrary to the Rule 29 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 and to based his findings thereon while sustaining the addition of Rs.12.50 lacs, can be said to be legal one

High Court Of Rajasthan Kailash Swaroop Agarwal vs. CIT Section 68 K.S. Jhaveri & Vijay Kumar Vyas, JJ. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 175 / 2012 3rd October, 2017 Counsel Appeared: P.K. Kasliwal for the Petitioner.: Parinitoo Jain for the Respondent. ORDER 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order …

Rajasthan H.C : The tax at margin rate as per the provisions of Section 164(2) is to be levied on the income earned from non-exempt asset

High Court Of Rajasthan CIT & Ors. vs. Santokba Durlabhji Trust Fund & Ors. Section 164(2), 13(1)(d)(iii) K. S. Jhaveri & Vijay Kumar Vyas, JJ. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 60/2015, 130/2015, 140/2015, 16/2016, 19/2016, 275/2016 12th September, 2017 Counsel Appeared: Sameer Jain for the Petitioner.: Gunjan Pathak for the Respondent ORDER Since these appeals arise …

Tag: Rajasthan High Court