NARAIN LAL AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

3: The appellant craves the right to add, delete or amend any of the\ngrounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal.\nThis is a general ground raised that does not require adjudication.\n6.\nIn the result, the appeal of the appellant is treated as dismissed.”\nFeeling dissatisfied, the assessee has preferred this appeal

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN EMPLOYEES CREDIT & THIRFT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the results appeal of the assessee in ITA No

3)\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] on 11.12.2018.\n2.\nIn this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: -\n\"1.\nThat, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A),\nNFAC, is wrong unjust and has erred in law in confirming the action of Ld.\nAssessing Officer in holding that

M/S. PRIME OCEANIC PVT. LTD. GANDHI NAGAR, UPLA SONAVA, SCHEME NO.8, ALWAR,ALWAR vs. ITO WARD-2(3), ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the disallowance so made is directed to be deleted and the ground of appeal is allowed

2(3), Alwar “Ground of Appeal No. 1 & 1.1: Under these grounds of appeal, assessee has challenged the disallowance of Rs,28,40,000/- , being Sales Promotion Expenses paid to foreign agent by alleging that assessee has failed to deduct TDS on such payment as per provisions of section

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA GADEPAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SAVINA-UDAIPUR

3)", "Section 144B", "Section 263", "Section 194A", "Section 195", "Section 115BBD", "Section 90(2)"], "issues": "1. Whether the PCIT correctly invoked powers under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act. 2. Whether TDS

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

TDS u/s. 194C of the act\nwerereceived as contract receipts for removal of solid waste and the same was\nconsidered as violative of provision of section 2(15) of the Act. The second part of\nthe notice was that the assessee has advanced a sum of Rs. 2,25,68,932/- to the\nperson covered u/s. 13(3

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(3

ZILA PARYAWARN SUDHAR SAMITI,JHUNJHUNU vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

2. Against the work performed certain payments (having nature of contractual payments etc.) from F.Y. 2016-17 to F.Y. 2018-19 have been paid by various payers. 3. On impugned payments, TDS u/s 194C/194D/194H of the Income Tax Act have been deducted by the payers entities. 4. As such, the applicant is receiving contractual receipts/insurance commission/ commission payments. Hence, impugned

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

2,83,18,907 3. M/s Olive Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 1,30,00,000 Total 6,26,90,957 In this regard, at the outset it is submitted that the search in the case of alleged Praveen Jain &Bhanwar Lal Jain group, was conducted on October, 2013, whereas captioned purchase bills pertain to F. Y. 2011-12 and thus

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

2,83,18,907 3. M/s Olive Overseas Pvt. Ltd. 1,30,00,000 Total 6,26,90,957 In this regard, at the outset it is submitted that the search in the case of alleged Praveen Jain &Bhanwar Lal Jain group, was conducted on October, 2013, whereas captioned purchase bills pertain to F. Y. 2011-12 and thus

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

TDS not eligible for\ndeduction under Section 36(1)(ii) or Section 37 [“Issue No. 2"].\n•\nExcess MAT Credit, pertaining to AY 2016-17, Rs. 96,13,814 erroneously\nallowed. [\"Issue No. 3

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA no

section 11 to 13 of the Income\ntax Act.\n4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case ld. Lower Authorities\ngrossly erred in making addition of Rs. 33,50,772/- to the income of the\nassessee appellant trust while disallowing the benefit of exemption under\nsection 11(2) and 11(1)(a) of the Act as claimed

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

Section 11 to 13 of the Income\ntax Act.\n4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case ld. Lower Authorities\ngrossly erred in making addition of Rs.33,50,772/- to the income of the\nassessee appellant trust while disallowing the benefit of exemption under\nSection 11(2) and 11(1)(a) of the Act as claimed

KAMLESH KUMAR JAIN,PACHPAHAR vs. DCIT-ACIT CIRCLE-2, KOTA

In the result, the appeal filed by the appellant stands allowed with no orders as to cost

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

3, claiming TDS under various section. However while processing ITR under section 143(1) a demand of Rs. 2,61,710/- was raised

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

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

3. This office considered the above reply and the case laws cited therein by the AR of the assessee, but not found tenable on merits as the assessee has not deducted TDS on selling commission payment of Rs. 2,11,07,351/-, on Exhibition expenses Rs. 15,70,429/- and on Testing Expenses Rs. 2,09,191/- to non-residents

M/S SILVEX & CO. (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

section 145 (2) could not be invoked Ground of Appeal No. 3 & 3.1: M/s Silvex & Co. (India) Ltd. Not pressed Ground of Appeal No. 4: In this ground of appeal, assessee challenged the action of ld.CIT(A) in confirming the action of ld. AO in making disallowance of Rs. 11,709/- on account of TDS

M/S SILVEX & CO. (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

section 145 (2) could not be invoked Ground of Appeal No. 3 & 3.1: M/s Silvex & Co. (India) Ltd. Not pressed Ground of Appeal No. 4: In this ground of appeal, assessee challenged the action of ld.CIT(A) in confirming the action of ld. AO in making disallowance of Rs. 11,709/- on account of TDS

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

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the Ld CIT (Appeals).

3 read with 4. In para 5 of the judgment, their Lordships found that: 'Section 34 casts obligation upon Collector to pay interest after compensation is worked out. Section 28 puts similar obligation upon the Court when the Court finds that the compensation awarded under section 11 was inadequate. Therefore, there is no change in nature of interest either u/s.28