ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA , JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section 271(1)(c) in respect of aforesaid two issues - As regards amount received by assessee as advance, Tribunal found that since said amount had been shown in balance sheet annexed to original return, there was no intention on part of assessee to conceal - With regard to disallowance qua TDS on account of non- deposit of same with Government, Tribunal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

section\n271(1)(c) in respect of aforesaid two issues - As regards amount received by\nassessee as advance, Tribunal found that since said amount had been shown in\nbalance sheet annexed to original return, there was no intention on part of\nassessee to conceal - With regard to disallowance qua TDS on account of non-\ndeposit of same with Government, Tribunal

STATE BANK OF INDIA (EARLIER KNOWN AS SBBJ),AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), AJMER, AJMER

section 143(3) passed by ITO, Ward-5 without issuing notice under\nsection 143(2) and only in pursuance with notice issued by ITO, Ward- 4,\nwho did not enjoy jurisdiction over assessee, was null and void.\nThe Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata the case of Jigna Chetan Mehta v. Assistant\nCommissioner of Income Tax, Circle-33, Kolkata decided

DULHE RAM MEENA, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

Bench: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action of the Id. ADDL/JCIT (A) is illegal, arbitrary, and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by quashing the entire order passed by the Id. AO (CPC). 2. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. ADDL/JCIT (A) has erred

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

TDS 1,44,565 Nil Nil Thus after the order of ITAT dt.10.04.2018 (PB 18-83), following disallowance made by the AO stood confirmed:- RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR Disallowance of CSR Expenses Rs.1,41,42,000/- Disallowance u/s 14A Rs. 71,75,575/- After the order of Hon’ble ITAT, AO again

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

143 provide that no\norder under this sub-section shall be made, denying the\nbenefits of clause (23C) of section 10, unless the Assessing\n186-196\nOfficer has intimated the Central Government or\nprescribed authority the contravention of the provisions of\nsub-clause (iv) or sub-clause (v) or sub-clause (vi) or sub-\nclause (via) of clause

SAKET AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

143(3)\nDate of Hearing\nORDER PASSED ON Dt 23-\n04-2021\n[DIN-ITBA/AST/S/143(3)/2021-\n22/1032653454(1)]\nTime Allowed\nNA\n19-04-2021\n22-04-2021\n2 days time to file the reply (19\n& 22 has to be excluded as\nper the Judgement)\n19-03-2021\n21-03-2021\n1 days time to file the reply

ASSOCIATED SOAPSTONE DISTRIBUTING CO PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

TDS, the Tribunal considered it compensatory and thus deductible, and the NFAC's view was plausible. For the excess MAT credit, the Tribunal found that rectifying the issue would fall under Section 154, not Section 263, as it involved a mistake rather than an erroneous application of law.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["Section 14A", "Section 36(1)(ii)", "Section 37", "Section

DUSHYANT KUMAR TYAGI,G1-1103 R.I.A. vs. DCIT CPC BENGALURU, BHIWADI

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

TDS on interest paid u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Even otherwise, the claim of the assessee is allowable u/s 37(1) read with section second proviso to Section 40(a)(ia) further read with first proviso to section 201(1) of I.T. Act, 1961 inserted by Finance Act, 2012 w.e.f. 01-04-2013 in view

SINCERE ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRLCE-7, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal no

143 or 144 as the case may be\nEssentially the proceeding u/s.147 with regard to the escaped income\nrelate to the same proceeding which is commenced with the filling of the\nreturn u/s.139 or service of the notice u/s.142(1). Such proceedings are\nnot sperate or distinct from the original assessment proceeding. Thus,\nconsidering the above stated facts and circumstances

SINCERE ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal no

143 or 144 as the case may be\nEssentially the proceeding u/s.147 with regard to the escaped income\nrelate to the same proceeding which is commenced with the filling of the\nreturn u/s.139 or service of the notice u/s.142(1). Such proceedings are\nnot sperate or distinct from the original assessment proceeding. Thus,\nconsidering the above stated facts and circumstances

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated\nhereinabove

TDS | 1,44,565 | Nil | Nil\n\nThus after the order of ITAT dt.10.04.2018 (PB 18-83), following disallowance\nmade by the AO stood confirmed:-\n\n5\nITA NO.309 & 310/JPR/2025\nRAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR\n\nDisallowance of CSR Expenses\nDisallowance u/s 14A\nRs.1,41,42,000/-\nRs.71,75,575/-\n\nAfter

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

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

143(2) of the I.T. Act was issued on 9- 09-2017 by fixing the case for hearing on 26-09-2017. Further to complete the assessment proceedings, notice u/s 142(1) alongwith questionnaire was issued through ITBA Portal on 05-07-2018 and in response thereto the assessee submitted required details/ documents and on perusal of the same

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

143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) was issued on 25/08/2016. The A.O. after making enquiry and considering the details available with him assessed total income of assessee at Rs. 2,63,59,658/- by making various additions. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee carried the matter before

SH. HARI PRAKASH GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

TDS of\nRs.21,850/- has been deducted. The same is also evident from Form 26AS. As\nper the contract assessee was to provide IT training to the students.\n2.\nThe AO observed that the assessee had made payment against credit\ncard bills amounting to Rs.5,26,000/- and earned contract receipts of\nRs.13,90,000/-. Assessee has not responded

AJOY SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

143(3)/148 on 23.08.2018 at an income of Rs. 14,09,150/-. While\nframing assessment, penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act for\nfurnishing inaccurate particulars of income to the extent of wrong claim of\ndeductions amounting to Rs 1,59,000/- under Chapter-VIA of the income-tax Act,\nwrong claim of loss

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

TDS deducted. Total 6,26,000/- These persons are not specified persons u/s 13(2) of the Act and the advance given is also not investment/deposits referred to u/s 11(5) and thus there is no violation of section 11(5) r.w.s. 13(1)(d) of the Act. 5. The decisions relied by the AO are not applicable

CURRENT INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,BASANT VIHAR vs. ACIT, DCIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR , BABA SIDHNATH BAHWAN

Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, had restricted TDS credit based on Rule 37BA. The assessee had filed