ITO, WARD No. 1(4), ALWAR V. M/S. PRADEEP KUMAR JAIN, HUF, ALWAR

ITA 98/JPR/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2021] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7233 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-11-2021
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 22-01-2020
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: MAHESH JAIN

Judgement Text

vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj U;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh ,u-ds-lSuh] mik/;{k ,oa Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 98/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year :2019-20 Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Alwar. cuke Vs. M/s Pradeep Kumar Jain, HUF, 338, Basant Vihar, Scheme No. 3, Alwar. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAEHP 7535 F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Runi Pal (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahesh Jain (CA) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 30/11/2021 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date of Pronouncement : 30/11/2021 vkns'k@ ORDER PER: N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT This is an appeal by the Revenue against the order dt. 12/03/2019 of the Ld. CIT(Alwar). 2. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal. 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 41,34,725/- made by the Assessing officer on account of income from undisclosed sources routed through the entries of Bogus Long Term Capital Gain in Penny Stock obtained by the assessee. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,06,736/- made by the Assessing officer on account of unexplained expenditure from undisclosed sources in making payment of commission for obtaining entries of Bogus Long Term Capital Gain in Penny Stock”. ITA 98/JP/2020_ ITO Vs M/s Pradeep Kumar Jain HUF 2 3. In this appeal, the assessee preferred immunity under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 and the A.O. in his report dated 13/08/2021 stated in respect of Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain (assessee) as under: “02. Shri Pradeep Kumar Jain (PAN-ADRPK4681R): The assessee has applied VsVs Scheme-2020 of the department on 14/05/2020. After verification the Pr.CIT-1, Jaipur has issued form No. 03 vide certificate No. 2278175420020321 dated 02/03/2021 (copy enclosed). Due to updation of e-filing portal further form 04 and 05 could not be issued.” 4. From the aforesaid notings of the A.O., it appears that the assessee deposited the due tax but Form No. 4 and 5 under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2020 could not be issued due to updation of e-filing portal. We, therefore, considering this fact that the assessee had adopted Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme which has been accepted by the department but due to updation of e-filing portal, Form No. 4 and 5 in this case could not be issued, deem it appropriate to consider this appeal of the department as infructuous. In case it is found later on by the department that due taxes have not been deposited by the assessee, the department would be at liberty to request for recalling of this appeal. 5. In the result, this appeal of the department is dismissed. (Order pronounced on 30/11/2021 ) Sd/- Sd/- ¼lanhi x®lkÃa½ ¼,u-ds-lSuh½ (SANDEEP GOSAIN) (N.K. SAINI) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member mik/;{k@Vice President Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 30/11/2021 *Ranjan ITA 98/JP/2020_ ITO Vs M/s Pradeep Kumar Jain HUF 3 vkns'k dh izfrfyfi vxzsf’kr@Copy of the order forwarded to: 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(4), Alwar. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- M/s Pradeep Kumar Jain HUF, Alwar. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 4. vk;dj vk;qDr¼vihy½@The CIT(A) 5. foHkkxh; izfrfuf/k] vk;dj vihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqj@DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File (ITA No. 98/JP/2020) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order, lgk;d iathdkj@Asst. Registrar