ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

section 80IA(8) of the Act.\n30.10. Considering that TPO has disputed the Grid rate not to be\nthe market value in terms of provisions of Section 80A(6) of the\nAct, we would like to state here that that unlike Section 80IA(8),\nthe word \"OR\" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the\nAct

KRYA VIKRAYA SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED DEOLI,DEOLI TONK vs. ITO TONK, TONK

Appeal of the appellant is dismissed and the order of the AO is confirmed

Bench: Him.

234C which is unlawful, unjustifiable and against the natural justice hence deserve to be quashed. 6. The appellant prays your honour to add, amend alter, delete all or any ground of appeal on or before hearing.” 2.2 In this appeal, the ld. AR of the assessee raised additional ground under Rule 11 of ITAT Rules, 1963 which reads as under

SHRI SUNDER LAL ADVANI,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA

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

TDS on interest by brushing aside assessee’s reasonable explanations and submissions and the learned CIT (Appeals), Kota also erred in confirming the same to the extent of Rs. 55,820/- without there being any basis. 4. That the ld. Assessing Officer further erred in disapproving the carried forward Speculation loss of A.Y. 2011-12 and making an addition

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.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

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.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

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)

234C (Rs. 2,55,24,706/-) - Short Grant of 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

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

Section 80IA (8) of the Act. In CIT vs. Thiagarajar Mills Ltd. in Tax Case(Appeal) Nos.68 to 70 of 2010 dated 07-06-2010, it was held that captive consumption of power generated by the assessee from its own power plant would enable the assessee to derive profit and gains by working out the cost of such consumption

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

TDS in this year only since was shown in AS 26 of this year only. 3. As per Section 22, “Annual Letting value” which was available in this case, hence was rightly declared. The impugned disallowance kindly be deleted in full.” 9.4 On the other hand, the ld. DR strongly relied upon the findings recorded by the authorities below

PANKAJ RASTOGI,JAIPUR vs. CIT (A) NFAC, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

TDS made. 6. Per Contra, the ld. DR relied on the order of lower authorities and also admitted that there is no fault of the assessee as employer has not deducted tax but not paid to the credit of the Government and in accordance with the provisions of section 205 no recovery be made on the assessee. The credit should

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

MEHAR CHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Itat & The Delay Occurred May Kindly Be Condoned.

section 56 of IT Act, 1961 and the CIT(A) has erred in not giving any finding thereon. 3. The Ld. AO has erred in law as well on the facts and circumstances of the case in not giving the credit of TDS of Rs.56,122/- u/s 194A and self assessment tax of Rs.7,230/- u/s 140A

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

234C of the Act. The\nappellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest,\nso charged, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in\nfull.\n3\nITA Nos.197 to 199/JP/2025\nAhluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Pvt. Ltd.\n6. The appellant prays your honour to add, amend or alter any of the grounds

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

234C of the Act. The\nappellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest,\nso charged, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in\nfull.\n3\nITA Nos.197 to 199/JP/2025\nAhluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Pvt. Ltd.\n6. The appellant prays your honour to add, amend or alter any of the grounds

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

234C of the Act. The\nappellant totally denies it liability of charging of any such interest. The interest,\nso charged, being contrary to the provisions of law and facts, kindly be deleted in\nfull.\n3\nITA Nos.197 to 199/JP/2025\nAhluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Pvt. Ltd.\n6. The appellant prays your honour to add, amend or alter any of the grounds

AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

Section 263 of the Act wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. 1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. PCIT. has failed to appreciate that the Assessment Order was neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue, thus, order passed u/s 263 of the Act is perverse, arbitrary

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

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

Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment of any other person (Validity of) - Assessment year 2007- 08 - In appellate proceedings, Tribunal recorded a finding that satisfaction for initiation of proceedings under section 153C was recorded by Assessing officer on 02-02-2015 - Tribunal thus opined that Assessing Officer could not have initiated and passed

ARUN BHARDWAJ,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1 , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

234C of the Act. 5. The appellant reserved his right to add, amend or alter the grounds of appeal on or before the date of appeal hearing. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 21 days. The ld. A/R has filed condonation application dated 20.11.2024 stating that “ That reason for late filing was that the order would

MAHESH CHAND GOYAL,ALWAR vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalmahesh Chand Goyal, H-6, Rishi Trading Co., Newanaj Mandi, Alwar 301001 Pan No.:Abtpg9841M ...... Appellant Vs.

TDS u/s. 194Q. 4 The appellant craves leave to add, amend or withdraw any of the grounds of appeal during the course of appellate proceedings. The grounds of appeal are without prejudice to each other. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 09.11.2022 declaring total income