LODHA FOUNDATION, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

Deemed Addition dividend u/s 2,66,149/- deleted by 2(22)(e) CIT(A) Jaipur ACIT Central u/s 143(3) Donation 17,100/- 2010-11 Circle-3 r.w.s. 153A Non Deduction 23,750/- Jaipur dt.19.03.2015 of TDS

KAIZEN ENTREPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT-DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

Deemed Addition dividend u/s 2,66,149/- deleted by 2(22)(e) CIT(A) Jaipur ACIT Central u/s 143(3) Donation 17,100/- 2010-11 Circle-3 r.w.s. 153A Non Deduction 23,750/- Jaipur dt.19.03.2015 of TDS

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. KAIZEN ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck 7751L ...... Appellant Vs. Acit, Central Circle, Kota ...... Respondent Acit, Circle-2, Kota ...... Appellant Vs. M/S. Kaizen Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Opera Hospital Road, S-67-68, Indra Vihar, Kota- 324005 Pan No.: Aabck7751L ...... Respondent

Deemed Addition dividend u/s 2,66,149/- deleted by 2(22)(e) CIT(A) Jaipur ACIT Central u/s 143(3) Donation 17,100/- 2010-11 Circle-3 r.w.s. 153A Non Deduction 23,750/- Jaipur dt.19.03.2015 of TDS

SH. NAWAL KISHORE DANGAYACH,A-34-A, RAM NAGAR, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

dividend or investment in shares during the year under consideration. It is a true fact that once exempt income is not earned then no disallowance u/s 14A can be made in view of the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs Kohinoor Project Pvt. Ltd. (supra) wherein it is mentioned that Section 14A would

DRAWMET WIRES PVT. LTD.,ALWAR vs. ACIT, ALWAR

In the result, both the assessee of the appeals are allowed

TDS u/s 194 instead of DDT u/s 115 O. Therefore there are various factual mistake in the return of income as well as in the challan which shows that the assessee has inadvertently and due to inexperience staff has shown this amount in the return of income as dividend declared during the year under consideration. Once the assessee has produced

M/S. MAHARAJA SHREE UMAID MILLS LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

deemed to accrue or arise in India. Section 9(1)(ii) to 9(1)(vii) deals with the taxability of the salary income, dividend income, interest income, royalty income and income by way of fees for technical services. An explanation similar to that provided in section 195 is also introduced in section 9 with retrospective effect from 01.06.1976 but same

DCIT, C-4, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JLC ELECTROMET PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

dividends referred to in section 115-0. Explanation 1.-For the purposes of this section, where any interest or other sum as aforesaid is credited to any account, whether called "Interest payable account" or "Suspense account" or by any other name, in the books of account of the person liable to pay such income, such crediting shall be deemed

M/S BHANDARI HEALTH CARE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

dividend tax deducted by the company where as the M/s Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur fact of the case on hand is related to the tax deducted for the payment made for expenditure of the company and thus, the facts are different. 6.2 Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the findings of the lower authorities

M/S BHANDARI HEALTH CARE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-3, JAIPUR

dividend tax deducted by the company where as the M/s Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. ACIT, Jaipur fact of the case on hand is related to the tax deducted for the payment made for expenditure of the company and thus, the facts are different. 6.2 Per contra, the ld. DR relied upon the findings of the lower authorities

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR, ALWAR vs. ALWAR ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD., ALWAR

In the result, the Cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

dividend received from RCDF by incorrectly holding that assessee has not submitted sufficient evidence for claim of said deduction. 2. The assessee craves right to add, alter, amend, and modify any of the ground of appeal. 3. Necessary cost be awarded to the assessee.” 5. The brief facts as culled out from the records are that the case

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LTD. ,KOTA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA

Appeal is allowed and the impugned order passed by Learned PCIT is hereby set aside

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal, Feeling Dissatisfied With The Order Dated 19.03.2025 Passed By Learned Pcit

dividend (as per section 115BBD) vs. finance income of Rs. 71,80,35,464/-. The reason for setting aside of the impugned assessment order is that in the opinion of Learned PCIT, said order was found suffering from specific defects, was erroneous and also prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue. 2. Arguments heard. Filed perused. 3. The assessee-appellant

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

TDS )Rs. 22,947/-) Shree Cement Limited, Beawar. Aggrieved by the order of AO, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT (Appeals). In response to the notice issued under section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, the assessee filed written submissions along with paper book etc. The ld. CIT (A) after considering the submissions of the assessee partly allowed

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

dividends to its shareholders and had good amount of book profit, was, nevertheless, filing a return of nil income for the purpose of income tax. (c) When once the assessee company had developed housing project, where the income is exempted u/s 80IB(10), the assessee company had legitimate expectation to enjoy the benefit of exemption and even a legitimate expectation

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

dividends to its shareholders and had good amount of book profit, was, nevertheless, filing a return of nil income for the purpose of income tax. (c) When once the assessee company had developed housing project, where the income is exempted u/s 80IB(10), the assessee company had legitimate expectation to enjoy the benefit of exemption and even a legitimate expectation

APM INDUSTRIES LTD,BHIWADI, ALWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 203/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 APM Industries Ltd. SP-147, Industrial Area Bhiwadi, Alwar cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-01, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCA 5114 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a l

TDS has been made u/s. 206C of the Act. Therefore, the contention of the assessee duty drawn back shown in ITR not considered. This claim of the assessee is supported by the documents placed on record, 24 APM Industries Ltd vs. DCIT reflected the amount in the audited accounts and the ITR filed by the assessee and therefore, we note

M/S GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,TELANGANA vs. PCIT 2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS on managerial commission - ground No. 6.\n11. Submission made by the ld. AR on various issues which are being\nmentioned in the subsequent paragraphs alongwith respective grounds of\nappeal, are tabulated in short as below for the sake of convenience (taken\nfrom submission of ld.AR):\nSI.\nNo.\n1.\nIssue\nDisallowance of interest of\nRs.89

RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORP. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, both set of cross appeals for the respective assessment years are disposed off with above directions

TDS qualifies for deduction u/s 80IA. Therefore, other miscellaneous income comprising of site plan charges,lease agreement form, road cutting charges, penalty recovered from contractor etc. are eligible for deduction u/s 80IA. This has been accepted by Hon’ble ITAT in assessee’s own case (supra) and therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) is not correct in not allowing the deduction

CAREER POINT LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

dividend and tax free interest, no part of expenditure appears to have been made towards the investment activity as emerging from the material. According to the respondent, the total investment from the huge surplus is comparatively small and investment made was effortless, without any burden of administrative expenses. In view of fact that no expenditure was incurred for earning exempted