RAJENDRA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

Appeal is hereby dismissed

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

10,00,000 Ajayji 20/3/13 25,00,000 Sanjayji 1/3 25,00,000 Satyanarainji 15/3 Sh. Rajendra Agarwal 35,00,000 Sureshji 26/3 1,40,00,000 The amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- advanced to Sheela Devi pertains to AY 2014-15 and the balance amount of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- pertains to AY 2013-14. The interest

RAJENDRA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

Appeal is hereby dismissed

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

10,00,000 Ajayji 20/3/13 25,00,000 Sanjayji 1/3 25,00,000 Satyanarainji 15/3 Sh. Rajendra Agarwal 35,00,000 Sureshji 26/3 1,40,00,000 The amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- advanced to Sheela Devi pertains to AY 2014-15 and the balance amount of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- pertains to AY 2013-14. The interest

RAJENDRA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

Appeal is hereby dismissed

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

10,00,000 Ajayji 20/3/13 25,00,000 Sanjayji 1/3 25,00,000 Satyanarainji 15/3 Sh. Rajendra Agarwal 35,00,000 Sureshji 26/3 1,40,00,000 The amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- advanced to Sheela Devi pertains to AY 2014-15 and the balance amount of Rs. 1,15,00,000/- pertains to AY 2013-14. The interest

TIRUPATI COLLEGE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

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

25 M/s.Tirupati College of Technical Education Society vs LD. CIT( Exemption), Jaipur 12.3 Now the assessee would like to give the summery of source of fund and investment of fund as on 31.03.2012 as under: Copy of Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2012 is here by enclosed to prove the same. (PB 37) Source of fund Amount Investment of Amount fund

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALWAR vs. ASHOK SHARMA, REWARI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

25,930/-.\nThe case was selected for complete scrutiny assessment under E-\nassessment Scheme 201on the following issues;\nS. No.\ni.\nIssues\nWinning from Lottery / Cross word Puzzles / Horse Races\nii.\nRefund Claim\niii.\nSales Turnover / Receipts\nStatutory notices as required from time to time were issued and\nserved on the assessee. In response the assessee submitted the\ndetails along

M/S WHOLESALE CLOTH MERCHANT,KOTA vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 688/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: ………………………… M/S Wholesale Cloth Merchant Cuke Pr.C.I.T. (Central), Vs. Association, Jaipur (Rajasthan) New Cloth Market, Kota. Pan No.: Aaatw 0127 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Siddarth Ranka & Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Advs) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pr.Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Dated 22/03/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(3) & 12Aa(4) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. That In The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld Pr. Cit(Central), Rajasthan, Jaipur Has Grossly Erred In Cancelling The Registration Of The Assessee Appellant Trust Under Section 12A Of The Act By Invoking Section 12Aa(4) Of The Act W.E.F. 01/04/2013. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Alter, Modify Or Amend Any Ground On Or Before The Date Of Hearing.”

TDS provisions have not been complied properly. Therefore, the assessee is not entitled for claiming exemption under section 11 to 13 of the I.T. Act, 1961. It was also submitted by the ld CIT-DR that in view of above findings, the activities of the assessee Trust falls under the purview of Section 12AA

KRISHAN PAL SINGH HUF,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the Ld CIT (Appeals).

10. The issue raised by the assessee and the contention of the revenue both has been discussed in detailed in the decision given by the co-ordinate bench of ITAT Pune in the case of Kusum Jayram Thakur Dhutum Vs. ITO [162 taxmann.com 388 (Pune - Trib.) ] wherein the bench at length deal with the issue as reproduced herein below

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S. JAGDAMBE STONE COMPANY, BHARATPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

10) When on the basis of the record it is not disputed that the requirements of further proviso were fulfilled, the assessee was not required to make any deduction at source on the payments made to the sub-contractors. If that be our conclusion, application of section 40(a)(ia) would not arise since, as already noticed, section

INFOOBJECTS SOFTWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 1499/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year : 2021-22 Infoobjects Software India Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Private Ltd. Income Tax, 5-E Patrikayan, 3rd Floor Jhalana Circle-04, Jaipur Institutional Area, Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AABCI8663B अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/ Assessee by : Sh. Naman Maloo, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by

10-21] which are of the nature supply of foods packets and not of the catering service. Had been a case of catering service the provision of section 194C shall apply but in this case this being the case of supply of foods and the same being subjected to GST the same shall not be considered as contract and therefore

GILLETTE INDIA LIMITED,SPA-65A, INDUSTRIAL AREA, BHIWADI, DISTRICT- ALWAR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

25,000/- is deducted and deposited in subsequent FY on payment basis u/s 192 of the Act. 5. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. PCIT has erred by holding that the total rent of Rs.8,74,00,000/- paid during the year should have been subjected to TDS under section

GOVERNEMNT SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL OFFICER TOOMLIKABAS, CHAKSU,CHAKSU vs. ACIT CPC TDS GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is dismissed

10. That the appellant prays for leave to add, alter, and amend the aforesaid grounds of appeal at or before the time of hearing of appeal.” 2. The hearing of the appeal was concluded through video conference in view of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 Pandemic. The assessee is the Principal of Secondary School and responsible for deducting

ACIT (TDS), JAIPUR vs. GNADHI VIDHYA MANDIR, CHURU

10 of the aforesaid statement. Infact despite the above, he has clarified that study centre only provide counselling to students and resolves the issues faced by the students enrolled with the appellant university, thus making the appellant’s ground more strong that the study centres are not providing services to the university but to the students and thus there

MAYA RATHORE,JAIPUR vs. ASSESSING AUTHORITY, JAIPUR

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

TDS of Rs.1,25,000 was duly deducted\nunder section 194H. Since income from Notus Tech Consulting Services Private Limited\nwas not received in the relevant AY 2023-24 but in next year i.e. was received in FY\n2023-24 and after calculating final income the assessee filed revised return on 25-12-\n2023 duly before the due date

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.

10 years. The said decision of the Government to give tax holiday in deserving cases cannot be abrogated or compromised by a technical interpretation of provisions of section 115JB on combined reading of the provisions of section 115JB on one hand and section 80IA and section 80IC on the other hand. 47. It is further a point of view that

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.

10 years. The said decision of the Government to give tax holiday in deserving cases cannot be abrogated or compromised by a technical interpretation of provisions of section 115JB on combined reading of the provisions of section 115JB on one hand and section 80IA and section 80IC on the other hand. 47. It is further a point of view that

M/S BHAGIRATH SHIKSHAN SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (E), WARD-1, JAIPUR

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

TDS by Punjab Technical University on the franchisee fees paid by them which is payment of part of the amount received from the students could not make the activity of the assessee as business as observed in the decision referred supra. Hence, for these reason the exemption u/s 10(23C) cannot be denied. 6. It was further submitted that another

TEJ PAL SINGH,REENGUS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NEEM KA THANA, NEEM KA THANA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Me That The Capital Gain Earned On This Land Acquired By Nhai Was Exempt In Terms Of Provision Section 10 Sub-Section (37) Of The Act. He Drew My Attention To The Relevant Provision Of Section 10(37) Of The Act As Under:-

25 year of service can save a sum of Rs. 3,32,600/- In the name of agreed addition, the addition has been made unlawfully because no such agreement was made by the assessee and alleged signature were taken on blank paper without explaining any details, nature and quantum of addition Sir, even the addition which are not permitted

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S ARIHANT TRADING CO., BHARATPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

25. Next ground of disallowance stated by the learned CIT is that Sec. 194C(6) and 194C(7) are to be read together, and if after obtaining PAN from the Transporters, the requisite particulars so obtained from the Transporters are not furnished to the prescribed Authority as provided U/S 194C(7), deduction and for that matter disallowance, U/S 194C