MANOJ KUMAR JAIN, PROP. MS BAJAJ RE ROLLING MILLS,KOTA vs. ITO(TDS), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are disposed off accordingly

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

TDS) be directed not to levy tax u/s 206C(1) and interest u/s 206C(7). It is submitted that first proviso to section 206C(6A

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN PROP. MS BAJAJ RE ROLLING MILLS,KOTA vs. ITO(TDS), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are disposed off accordingly

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

TDS) be directed not to levy tax u/s 206C(1) and interest u/s 206C(7). It is submitted that first proviso to section 206C(6A

SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR JAIN,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, AJMER

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

6A)/(7) of the Act. The First contention of the assessee is that the material sold by the assessee which was purchased from the railways in the auction does not fall in the definition of scrap 5 Shri Pramod Kumar Jain vs. ITO ,TDS as provided in clause (b) of Section

RAJDHANI MINERAL JAIPUR PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS-I , JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

section 206C(6A)/206C(7) of the Income Tax Act, by ITO, TDS-1, Jaipur. 2. The assessee has marched

RAMDAS TRADING COMPANY,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS, ALWAR

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

Section 206C(6A) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A), accordingly, confirmed the findings of the Assessing officer and tax demand of Rs. 1,55,920/- so levied by the Assessing Officer. 8. Now the assessee is in appeal before us. The ld AR of the assessee has reiterated the submissions as made before the lower authorities. It was submitted

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. MOTION EDUCATION PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the\ncross objection of the assessee are allowed

TDS) [2023] 154 taxmann.com 465 (SC) passed order as under-\nORDER\n1. Delay condoned.\n2. Leave granted.\nThis two sentence order establishes the application of mind of Hon'ble Supreme\nCourt of India. The application of mind is the whole process through which the all\nthe facts and questions of law has been considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court\nand

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. MOTION EDUCATION PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.472 & 455/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 DCIT, Central Circle, Kota बनाम Vs. Motion Education Limited, 394, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Kota Private स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAICM4637L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Motion Limited, CO. Nos.20 & 21/JP/2025 (Arising out of ITA. Nos.472 & 455/JP/2025) निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 &

TDS) [2023] 154 taxmann.com 465 (SC) passed order as under- ORDER 1. Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. This two sentence order establishes the application of mind of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The application of mind is the whole process through which the all the facts and questions of law has been considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S EID MOHAMMAD NIZAMUDDIN , TONK

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

TDS-3 Vs M/s Eid Mohammad Nizamuddin 4. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that a survey U/s 133A(2A) of the Act, a newly inserted Section by the Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01/10/2014 was conducted at the assessee’s business premises on 23/03/2015 for the purpose of TDS/TCS verification. During the course

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S EID MOHAMMAD NIZAMUDDIN , TONK

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

TDS-3 Vs M/s Eid Mohammad Nizamuddin 4. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that a survey U/s 133A(2A) of the Act, a newly inserted Section by the Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01/10/2014 was conducted at the assessee’s business premises on 23/03/2015 for the purpose of TDS/TCS verification. During the course

INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S EID MOHAMMAD NIZAMUDDIN , TONK

In the result, all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

TDS-3 Vs M/s Eid Mohammad Nizamuddin 4. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that a survey U/s 133A(2A) of the Act, a newly inserted Section by the Finance Act, 2014 w.e.f. 01/10/2014 was conducted at the assessee’s business premises on 23/03/2015 for the purpose of TDS/TCS verification. During the course

ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

section 36 (i)(iii). The assessee firm did not borrow any fresh money during the year and even have no opening borrowed money. Bank overdraft account is not borrowed money, because overdraft account is against the assessee own bank FDRs. It means bank overdraft is assesee own money taken out of FDR account temporarily. As and when the assessee needed

SHANKAR JHALANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

TDS is made. ITA 1053/JP/2016_ 26 Shankar Jhalani Vs. ITO 4. It may be noted that second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) inserted by FA, 2012 w.e.f. 01.04.2013 has provided that where an assessee fails to deduct tax on the sum paid to the resident but such resident payee has furnished the return, taken into account such

M/S BANSAL OIL MILL LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section provides that if any sum is found credited in the books of accounts, then the assessee has to prove the identity and creditworthiness of the party from whom amount is received and the genuineness of the transaction. In the present case, the assessee has not only proved the identity of the party from whom the loan has been taken

M/S ALLEN CAREER INSTITUTE,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, KOTA

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

6A. No Loss to Revenue: After the valid creation of liability, if a part of the scholarship cheques is not en-cashed, the related amount shall be/has been written back and in the scheme of income tax, Sec.41(1) fully takes care and such amount is deemed to be an income in the year in which it is credited back