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

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

273, Hon'ble Karnataka High Court has formulated a question as to whether non-filing of Form No. 15I/J within the prescribed time is only a technical default or the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are attracted? and proceeded to answer the same as under:— 'Section 40 (a)(ia) and Section 194C

SAURYA URJA COMPANY OF RAJASTHAN LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 199 x 37BA Therefore,\nthese grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes.\n4.3 Ground No. 3- This ground is general in nature and hence not adjudicated.\nThis ground is hence dismissed.\n5. In the result, the present appeal is partly allowed.”\n5.\nAggrieved with the part solution so provided by the Id. CIT(A) to the\ngrievance

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.

273 ITR 1/142 Taxman 713 (SC). (e) In the newly inserted sec. 115JC the legislature clearly mention that "deduction claimed, if any, under the heading "C.-Deductions in respect of certain incomes";, i.e. If the legislature have intention :; not give benefit of sec. 80IB(10) for the purpose of MAT calculation then legislature will also provide same type of provision

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.

273 ITR 1/142 Taxman 713 (SC). (e) In the newly inserted sec. 115JC the legislature clearly mention that "deduction claimed, if any, under the heading "C.-Deductions in respect of certain incomes";, i.e. If the legislature have intention :; not give benefit of sec. 80IB(10) for the purpose of MAT calculation then legislature will also provide same type of provision

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

273 were the two original penalty provisions, which require the penalty proceedings to be initiated during the course of relevant assessment proceedings or the other relevant proceedings, as the case may be. The penalty proceedings could also be initiated during the appellate proceedings arising out of the relevant assessment proceedings. It is only where the assessment proceedings are independent

M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY INDIA LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-7(4), JAIPUR

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

section 40--Rejection of books of account-- Revenue cannot rely on same books for disallowance and addition of specific items of expenditure--Assessee firm doing contract business--Books rejected and income estimated--Separate addition made of interest and remuneration paid to partners to income already estimated and assessed from contracts--Not justified--Income

ITO WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR vs. M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY G-1/35 TO 37, 47, 48 EPIP, JEWELLERY ZONE, SITAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

section 40--Rejection of books of account-- Revenue cannot rely on same books for disallowance and addition of specific items of expenditure--Assessee firm doing contract business--Books rejected and income estimated--Separate addition made of interest and remuneration paid to partners to income already estimated and assessed from contracts--Not justified--Income

AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR-1

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

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

TDS. The assessee is a Non-Banking Finance Company which is engaged in the business of providing small loans, vehicle loans, small and medium enterprises loans in rural and semi-urban areas, issuing debentures etc. It is noted from the assessment order that due to change of incumbent, notice u/s 142(1) along with the questionnaire was issued

SHRI VIRENDRA KUMAR JAIN,TONK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TONK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

TDS. However, the said decision is only on the issue of sale Sim cards and therefore, will not applicable in the case of the assessee. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs. Union of India 282 ITR 273 as also observed in paras 85 and 86 which are reproduced as under:- “85. In that

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO, TONK

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

TDS. However, the said decision is only on the issue of sale Sim cards and 7 Shri Manoj Kumar Jain vs. ITO therefore, will not applicable in the case of the assessee. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs. Union of India 282 ITR 273 as also observed in paras 85 and 86 which

ITO (TDS) ALWAR, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABA MOHAN RAMJI KALIKHOLI WALAMILKPUR GURJAR, ALWAR

9. In view of the above discussion, all the appeals filed by the department deserve to be dismissed

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

273/- made u/s 201(1) along with interest u/s 201(14) of Rs.3,33,827/- in respect of payment of Rs.1,46,69,701/- made to the trustees of the assessee and also payments of Rs.14,22,604/- on account of various expenditures holding that the impugned payments made by the assessee not come in the ambit of section 194C

ITO (TDS) ALWAR, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABA MOHAN RAMJI KALIKHOLI WALAMILKPUR GURJAR, ALWAR

9. In view of the above discussion, all the appeals filed by the department deserve to be dismissed

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

273/- made u/s 201(1) along with interest u/s 201(14) of Rs.3,33,827/- in respect of payment of Rs.1,46,69,701/- made to the trustees of the assessee and also payments of Rs.14,22,604/- on account of various expenditures holding that the impugned payments made by the assessee not come in the ambit of section 194C

ITO(TDS) ALWAR, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABA MOHAN RAMJI KALIKHOLI WALAMILKPUR GURJAR, ALWAR

9. In view of the above discussion, all the appeals filed by the department deserve to be dismissed

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

273/- made u/s 201(1) along with interest u/s 201(14) of Rs.3,33,827/- in respect of payment of Rs.1,46,69,701/- made to the trustees of the assessee and also payments of Rs.14,22,604/- on account of various expenditures holding that the impugned payments made by the assessee not come in the ambit of section 194C

ITO (TDS) ALWAR, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABA MOHAN RAMJI KALIKHOLI WALAMILKPUR GURJAR, ALWAR

9. In view of the above discussion, all the appeals filed by the department deserve to be dismissed

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

273/- made u/s 201(1) along with interest u/s 201(14) of Rs.3,33,827/- in respect of payment of Rs.1,46,69,701/- made to the trustees of the assessee and also payments of Rs.14,22,604/- on account of various expenditures holding that the impugned payments made by the assessee not come in the ambit of section 194C

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

CHOCOPACK ENTERPRISES,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

TDS. However, the said decision is only on the issue of sale Sim cards and therefore, will not applicable in the case 7 ITA 821/JP/16_ M/s Chocopack Enterprises Vs. ITO of the assessee. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. vs. Union of India 282 ITR 273 as also observed in paras

BARODA RAJASTHAN KHESTRIYA GRAMIN BANK,AJMER vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

273 ITR 683 (Guj): In this case, the Gujarat High Court held that the Commissioner cannot exercise revisionary jurisdiction under Section 263 merely because he disagrees with the opinion of the Assessing Officer, especially if the Assessing Officer has conducted proper inquiries and applied his mind to the facts of the case. The court emphasized that the Commissioner's revisionary

M/S SOMYA PRIYA INFRASTRUCTURE,BEHROR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act are not applicable. The said contention cannot be accepted in light of the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Palam Gas service vs. CIT 394 ITR 300. Second contention of the ld. AR is that the TDS on generator hire charges of Rs. 4,74,847 has been deducted