Gems & Art Plaza v. DCIT - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Raj Kumar & Anr. v. ITO 2023 TaxPub(DT) 2400 (Asr-Trib)
REFERRED Balwinder Kumar v. ITO 2023 TaxPub(DT) 1463 (Asr-Trib)
REFERRED Paramount Impex v. Asstt. CIT 2020 TaxPub(DT) 3070 (Chd-Trib)
REFERRED CIT v. Sakuntala Devi Khetan 2014 TaxPub(DT) 1671 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. Asstt. CIT 2009 TaxPub(DT) 0038 (Raj-HC)
REFERRED S.A. Builders Ltd. v. CIT (Appeals) & Anr. 2007 TaxPub(DT) 0833 (SC)
REFERRED CIT v. Anandha Metal Corporation 2005 TaxPub(DT) 0385 (Mad-HC)
REFERRED Bastiram Narayandas Maheshri v. CIT 1994 TaxPub(DT) 0876 (Bom-HC)
REFERRED Kishinchand Chellaram v. CIT 1980 TaxPub(DT) 1130 (SC)
REFERRED Chhabildas Tribhuvandas Shah & Ors. v. CIT 1966 TaxPub(DT) 0038 (SC)
REFERRED Sreelekha Banerjee & Ors. v. CIT 1963 TaxPub(DT) 0444 (SC)
REFERRED Dhakeswari Cotton Mills Ltd. v. CIT 1954 TaxPub(DT) 0123 (SC)
REFERRED Pandit Bros. v. CIT 1954 TaxPub(DT) 0083 (Punj-HC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 995 (Jod-Trib) IN THE ITAT JODHPUR BENCH M. L. MEENA, A.M. & ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M. Gems & Art Plaza v. DCIT I.T.A. Nos. 353& 354/Jodh/2023 5 January, 2024 Appellant by: Rajendra Jain, Adv. & Smt. Raksha Birla, CA. Respondent by: Ms. Nidhi Nair, Sr. DR. ORDER *Anikesh Banerjee, J.M.* Both the appeals of the same assessee were filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jaipur-5,(in brevity the CIT (A)) order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (in brevity the Act) for assessment years 2017-18 to 2018-19. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the learned ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur, (in brevity the assessing officer) order passed under section 143(3) of the Act. 2. At the outset, both the appeals are adjudicating from the same nature of fact but not have a common issue, for brevity, both the appeals are taken together, heard together, and disposed of together. For the sake of convenience, ITA No. 353/Jodh/2023 is taken as the lead case. ITA No. 353/Jodh/2023 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds which are reproduced as below: SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 995 (Jod-Trib)

IN THE ITAT JODHPUR BENCH

M. L. MEENA, A.M. & ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M.

Gems & Art Plaza v. DCIT

I.T.A. Nos. 353& 354/Jodh/2023

5 January, 2024

Appellant by: Rajendra Jain, Adv. & Smt. Raksha Birla, CA.

Respondent by: Ms. Nidhi Nair, Sr. DR.

ORDER

Anikesh Banerjee, J.M.

Both the appeals of the same assessee were filed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jaipur-5,(in brevity the CIT (A)) order passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, (in brevity the Act) for assessment years 2017-18 to 2018-19. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the learned ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur, (in brevity the assessing officer) order passed under section 143(3) of the Act.

2. At the outset, both the appeals are adjudicating from the same nature of fact but not have a common issue, for brevity, both the appeals are taken together, heard together, and disposed of together. For the sake of convenience, ITA No. 353/Jodh/2023 is taken as the lead case.

ITA No. 353/Jodh/2023

3. The assessee has taken the following grounds which are reproduced as below: