What is CIT v. Jain Construction Company authority for?

A High Court decision is a pure finding of fact if it's based on the appreciation of material and evidence, and thus not a referable question of law.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Jain Construction Company?

28 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Jain Construction Company (245 ITR 527), spanning 2015 to 2025.

CIT v. Jain Construction Company (245 ITR 527)

ACIT, PAOTA C ROAD vs. VARAHA INFRA LIMITED, PAOTA B ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 160/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur01 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaithe Acit Vs M/S. Vardha Infra Ltd. Room No. 215, Aayakar Bhawan 6 Jalam Vilas Scheme Paota C Road, Jodhpur Paota B Road, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccv 7972 K

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 40

…vehicles while some may take the same on hire. 9 Our attention was drawn towards the following judicial decisions this regard with are required to be appreciated white estimating net profit in the wise of the assesses: a. CIT v. Jain Construction Co. (2000) 245 ITR 527 (Raj) Reference Question of Fact Findings of Tribunal based on appreciation of material on record and evidence produced by assessee-Same pure finding of (act- No referable question of law arose 29 Varaha Infra Ltd. CBDT circular -Binding nature of circular-Powers of CBDT under 119 Scope In exercise of power unders. 119, CBDT is competent to r…

MADHUCON PROJECTS LTD, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYD, HYDERABAD

ITA 1326/HYD/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Mar 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya

Section 132Section 153ASection 254(2)Section 801ASection 80I

…Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member APPEALS Sl. Appeal No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1. 1937/Hyd/2014 2005-06 M/s. Madhucon Dy. Commissioner of 2. 1938/Hyd/2014 2006-07 Projects Limited, Income-tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3, 3. 1326/Hyd/2015 2005-06 PAN: AABCM4757A Hyderabad MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS Sl. ITA M.A. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1 126/Hyd/2015 683/Hyd/2010 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-4, Hyderabad 2 127/Hyd/20…

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 1938/HYD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Mar 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya

Section 132Section 153ASection 254(2)Section 801ASection 80I

…Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member APPEALS Sl. Appeal No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1. 1937/Hyd/2014 2005-06 M/s. Madhucon Dy. Commissioner of 2. 1938/Hyd/2014 2006-07 Projects Limited, Income-tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3, 3. 1326/Hyd/2015 2005-06 PAN: AABCM4757A Hyderabad MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS Sl. ITA M.A. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1 126/Hyd/2015 683/Hyd/2010 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-4, Hyderabad 2 127/Hyd/20…

MADHUCON PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

ITA 1937/HYD/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 Mar 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri Jeevan Lal Lavidiya

Section 132Section 153ASection 254(2)Section 801ASection 80I

…Madhucon Projects Limited, Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member AND Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member APPEALS Sl. Appeal No. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1. 1937/Hyd/2014 2005-06 M/s. Madhucon Dy. Commissioner of 2. 1938/Hyd/2014 2006-07 Projects Limited, Income-tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle-3, 3. 1326/Hyd/2015 2005-06 PAN: AABCM4757A Hyderabad MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS Sl. ITA M.A. A.Y. Appellant Respondent No. 1 126/Hyd/2015 683/Hyd/2010 2005-06 Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-4, Hyderabad 2 127/Hyd/20…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S HANUMAN TUBE WELL CO., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as assessee are dismissed

ITA 839/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Jain, Adv &For Respondent: Shri Sanjay Dhariwal, CIT-DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 145(3)Section 2(14)Section 45

…ee’s claimed CIT(A) Allowed. 1. Depreciation 7359058 7359058 2. Interest to partners 16354490 16354490 3. Remunerations to partners Nill - 4. Interest & Brokerage on 19932321 Not Allowed. Borrowed funds Kindly refer:- CIT v/s Jain Constriction Co. and others 245 ITR 527 and CIT v/s Bhawanvapath Neverwan (Bohra) and co. (No. 2) 258 ITR 440. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Ld. A.O. as well as ld. CIT(A) have erred both in law and facts in taxing capital gain Rs. 2,42,38,984/- from Ag. Land as income from capital gain whereas Ag. Land sold is not a capital asset as per section 2(14) (i…

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1131/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1130-1131/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2013-2014 & 2014-15) Bhavani Cotton Ginning & Pressing I.T.O., Factory, Vs. Ward-3(2)(5), Plot No.100/15, Gidc, Ahmedabad. Ranpur Road, Dhandhuka, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divitia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyusingh Yadav, Sr. D.R

Section 145(3)Section 250

…terest on partners’ capital account and remuneration to the partners. The issue with respect to deduction of depreciation is settled by various High 11.6 Courts in a number of cases. The Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v. Jain Construction Co. [2000] 245 ITR 527/110 Taxman 156, wherein circular issued by the CBDT in this regard has been relied upon. Same is reproduced here:– "171. Claim for depreciation - Where required particulars have not been furnished. – (1) Numerous instances have come to the notice of the Board where the assessee’s claim for depreciation duly shown in the return was not considered…

BHAVANI COTTON GINNING & PRESSING FACTORY,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(5),, AHMEDABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed

ITA 1130/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1130-1131/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Years: (2013-2014 & 2014-15) Bhavani Cotton Ginning & Pressing I.T.O., Factory, Vs. Ward-3(2)(5), Plot No.100/15, Gidc, Ahmedabad. Ranpur Road, Dhandhuka, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Divitia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyusingh Yadav, Sr. D.R

Section 145(3)Section 250

…terest on partners’ capital account and remuneration to the partners. The issue with respect to deduction of depreciation is settled by various High 11.6 Courts in a number of cases. The Rajasthan High Court in the case of CIT v. Jain Construction Co. [2000] 245 ITR 527/110 Taxman 156, wherein circular issued by the CBDT in this regard has been relied upon. Same is reproduced here:– "171. Claim for depreciation - Where required particulars have not been furnished. – (1) Numerous instances have come to the notice of the Board where the assessee’s claim for depreciation duly shown in the return was not considered…

M/S R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD. ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 136/JPR/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 136/Jp/2021 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2014-15 M/S R.G. Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Cuke D.C.I.T., 4, Tirupati Trade Centre, S.C. Vs. Circle-3, Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aaacr 8269 D Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2022 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 06/08/2021 For The A.Y. 2014-15, Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Rejection Of Books Of Account By Applying The Provisions Of Sec. 145(3). 2. The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Action Of Ao In Applying N.P. Rate Of 8% On Total Receipts Of Rs. 18,63,73,549/-, Thereby Computing The Business Income At Rs. 78,42,549/- (18,63,73,549*8%-70,67,877 Depreciation) As Against Net Loss Of Rs. 68,43,810/- Computed By The Assessee)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)

Section 145(3)Section 2Section 44A

…interest payment of Rs.1,10,07,464/- from the n.p. rate of 8% applied by him. If the same is allowed, there would not remain any income chargeable to tax. For this proposition reliance is placed on the following cases:- (i) CIT Vs. Jain Construction Company 245 ITR 527 (Raj.) (ii) CIT Vs. Bhawan Path Nirman (Bohra) and Co. 258 ITR 440 (Raj.) and 258 ITR 431 (Raj.) (iii) Shri Ganpatlal Sharma Vs. ITO ITA No.1675/JP/1993 dt. 26.5.2000 (Jaipur) (Trib.)Assessee was contractor and his income was assessed by estimating net profit rate subject to depreciation. AO declined to allow interest paid to creditors. CIT(A)…

SHRI BABOO LAL ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, ground no. 1 & 3 are dismissed, ground no

ITA 1370/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri G. M. Mehta (C.A.)For Respondent: Miss Chanchal Meena (JCIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 154Section 32Section 44A

…d. AO but later on disallowed/withdrawn through rectification order dt. 06.08.2013 u/s 154 of the IT Act i.e. after about 21 months of filing the appeal by assessee against order dt. 14.11.2011, ignoring the law laid down by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (245 ITR 527). 4. Additional and legal ground of appeal: Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in not allowing remaining depareciation of Rs. 2,27,013/- out of Rs. 2,38,263/- on fixed assets used in carrying on contract business by assessee {( @ 10% on shop of Rs. 22,87,000/- and @ 15% on tools & plant of Rs. 63,750/-} allowable as per expl. 5 to section 32 of IT Act f…

M/S. P.K. COTTON MILLS (P) LTD.,,MEERUT vs. ACIT, MEERUT

In the result, appeal by the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2504/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Dec 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 263

…. Jain Construction Co. & Ors., (2000) 245 ITR 0527, High Court of Rajasthan.— (Para—8) • CIT vs. Chopra Bros. India (P) Ltd., (2001) 252 ITR 0412, High Court of Punjab & Haryana. — (Para 4-6) • CBDT Circular No: 29-D (XIX-14), dated 31.08.1965— reproduced in 245 ITR 527 (Raj.) in Para 8. Appellant’s detailed reply with respect to interest paid is reproduced at page 3 of the assessment order. PB 64 is evidence to show that books were produced in original assessment proceeding. GROUND NO. 4 is not pressed in view of the direction already given by Ld. CIT(A) at page 4 of the CIT(A) Order.” Page 19 of 35 ITA No.-…

SALAUDDIN vs. DCIT,

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2/PAT/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.02/Pat/2011 (ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2007-2008) Salauddin, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Chhatradhari Bazar, Muzaffarpur Chapra, Saran स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Aasfs 5008 E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Kumar Anwar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Supriya Biswas, JCIT-DR

Section 44A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण,पटना न्यायपीठ,पटना IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PATNA BENCH, PATNA श्री चन्द्र मोहन गगग, न्द्याययक सदस्य एवं श्री एल.पी.साहु, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष। BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA MOHAN GARG, JM & SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.02/PAT/2011 (ननिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year :2007-2008) Salauddin, Vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Chhatradhari Bazar, Muzaffarpur Chapra, Saran स्थायी लेखा सं./PAN No. : AASFS 5008 E (अपीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. निर्धारिती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Sanjeev Kumar Anwar, Adv. राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Supriya Biswas, JCIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date…

M/S ALECTRA CONSTS.LTD.,,SAMASTIPUR vs. DCIT, DARBHANGA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1/PAT/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Sept 2019AY 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Pankaj Jyoti, ARFor Respondent: Shri Supriya Biswas, JCIT-DR

…eciation and the depreciation allowance should be deducted therefrom. This issue has also been decided by the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Shri Ram Jhanwar Lal (supra) relying on its earlier decisions in the case of Jain Construction Co. [2000] 245 ITR 527 and Bharat Construction Co. [2002] 125 Taxmann 366 (Raj) has held that where the Assessing Officer has adopted Net Profit rate in making assessment on best judgment assessment basis, even in that case allowance of depreciation is required to be made. Further the Hon’ble Patna High Court in the case of Shyam Bihari (supra) has observed as under :-…

SHASHI KANT KHETAN,JHUNJHUNU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JHUNJHUNU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 986/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jan 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Goyal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Jagdish Chand Kulhari (JCIT)

Section 145(3)

…12 15,50,02,341 1,27,29,257 8.21% D) NP @ 8% of gross receipts subject to further deduction on account of depreciation and interest was held by Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court and ITAT Jaipur as reasonable. a) CIT vs Jain Construction co & Others [2000] (Raj) 245 ITR 527 (Copy at PB pg 78-81) b) ITO vs Kumawat Contractors ITA No 115/JP/2013 order dated 09/10/2015 ITAT Jaipur Copy at PB 82-88. In this case estimation of profit by applying 6% of gross contract receipts subject to further deduction of depreciation, interest and remuneration to partner held as reasonable. c) Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs.…

M/S. PARIDA LABOUR SUPPLIERS,KHURDA vs. ITO, KHURDA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 115/CTK/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack07 Jun 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.S Sainiassessment Year :2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.C Sethi, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.N.Das, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144ASection 145(3)

…tion paid to partners from the income estimated by him at 10% of the receipts, relying on the following decisions: i) Ram Jhanwarlal V/s. ITO (321 ITR 400) (Raj) ii) Bharat Construction Co. V/s. CIT 258 ITR 140 (Raj) iii) CIT V/s. Jain Constructions Co. (245 ITR 527) (Raj) Hence, respectfully following the decision of the Hyderabad Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Gopal Krishna Builders (supra), I direct the Assessing Officer to allow deduction towards interest and remuneration paid to partners from the estimated income of 8% of gross contract receipts after verifying the partnership deed and in acc…

JANTA CONSTRUCTION CO.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 861/JPR/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT)

Section 145(3)

…at in the case of civil contractors where net profit rate is applied then further deductions for the depreciation, interest and remuneration paid to partners should be allowed. He further relied on the following case laws:- 1. CIT V/s Jain Construction Co. 245 ITR 527 (Raj. H/C) 2. M/s Kiran Udyog V/s DCIT 34 TW 80 (Jpr, ITAT) 3. Kalindee Rail NirmanEngg. Ltd V/s JCIT 25 TW 89 (ITAT, Jpr) 4. Mohta Construction & Co. V/s ITO, 21 TW 257 (ITAT, JP) 5. Khartaram Choudhary V/s ITO, 21 TW 6 (ITAT, Jaipur) 6. ITO V/s. Gopalaram Premaram 24 TW 442 (ITAT Jodhpur ) 6. The ld. Sr.DR has relied on the orders of the autho…