vk;djvihyh; vf/kdj.k] t;iqjU;k;ihB] t;iqj IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh jkBkSM + dey's k t;UrHkkbZ] y[s kk lnL; ,o Jh ujUs nz dqekj] U;kf;d lnL; d s le{k BEFORE: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM vk;dj vihy l-a@ITA No. 1121/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2011-12 Ranjit Thakur cuke Income Tax Officer, Plot No. 182 Achrol Vaya Achrol, Vs. Jaipur Ishar Marg, 1^st Street P O Achrol Amer, Jaipur LFkk;hy[s kk l-a@thvkbvZ kj l-a@PAN/GIR No.: AFYPT 6322 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj l@s Assessee by : Sh. S. L Poddar, Adv.

jktLo dh vksj l@s Revenue by: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-Sr. DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 07/01/2025 mn?kk"s k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 21/01/2025 vkn's k@ORDER PER: RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM The present appeal has been because the assessee is dissatisfied with the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Gurugram dated 12/08/2024 [ for short ld. CIT(A) ] for assessment year 2011-12. The said order of the ld. CIT(A) arose, as assessee had challenged the order dated 16.11.2018 passed under section 147 of the Income Tax Act [ fo