RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

2),\nIC, HRO, RS Branch, Jaipur. Jaipur.\nस्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACAR7371J\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Deepak Sharma, C.A.\nराजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by : Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 11/09/2025\nउदघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.\nThese are four appeals

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

2),\nIC, HRO, RS Branch, Jaipur.\nJaipur.\nस्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACAR7371J\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Deepak Sharma, C.A.\nराजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by : Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 11/09/2025\nउदघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.\nThese are four appeals

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

2),\nIC, HRO, RS Branch, Jaipur.\nJaipur.\nस्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACAR7371J\nअपीलार्थी / Appellant\nप्रत्यर्थी / Respondent\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Deepak Sharma, C.A.\nराजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by : Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 11/09/2025\nउदघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.\nThese are four appeals

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

2),\n| | | Jaipur.\n| स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AACAR7371J |\n| अपीलार्थी / Appellant | प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent |\n\nनिर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Deepak Sharma, C.A.\nराजस्व की ओरसे / Revenue by : Smt. Anita Rinesh, JCIT\nसुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 11/09/2025\nउदघोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025\n\nआदेश/ORDER\n\nPER: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, J.M.\n\nThese

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR, ALWAR vs. ALWAR ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD., ALWAR

In the result, the Cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

80P(2)(d) of Rs. 15,91,846/- being dividend received from RCDF by incorrectly holding that assessee has not submitted sufficient evidence for claim of said deduction. 2. The assessee craves right to add, alter, amend, and modify any of the ground of appeal. 3. Necessary cost be awarded to the assessee.” 5. The brief facts as culled

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.

section 80P(2)(c)(ii) in place of 80P(2)(a)(iii) is incorrect and that the error may kindly be rectified in your records. This reply of the assessee not convincing the ld. AO because the activities being carried out by the assessee. The provision of Sec. 80P(2)(a)(iii) of the Act, on which the assessee places

A3LOGICS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR -1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

2 and final finding is contained in Para 6.1 Pg. 9 of the order, The Ld. CIT himself admitted that the assesse has made the TDS on the amount of Rs.1,76,26,934/- and it is only the remaining amount of Rs. 1,43,91,971/- there was no short deduction of tax liable for addition. The finding

ITO(TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer provisions of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act are also not applicable on them. Hence by virtue of their creation they are not 2

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer provisions of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act are also not applicable on them. Hence by virtue of their creation they are not 2

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer provisions of Section 80P of the Income Tax Act are also not applicable on them. Hence by virtue of their creation they are not 2