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.

bogus purchases. 7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals), was not justified and erred in law in not considering incentives amounting to Rs. 3,39,74,28,174/- granted to the appellant as capital receipt which are not exigible to tax while computing total income under normal provisions

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.

bogus purchases. 7. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals), was not justified and erred in law in not considering incentives amounting to Rs. 3,39,74,28,174/- granted to the appellant as capital receipt which are not exigible to tax while computing total income under normal provisions

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. The society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society did not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA Nos.775 to 778/JP/2024 Uttrakhand Samaj 51/117 Sec 5, Pratap Nagar Sanganer, Jaipur cuke Vs. The CIT, Exemption Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATU 6874 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. K. L. Choudhary, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 20/08/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@D

purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. The society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society did not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPURTHE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed, for statistical

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

purchased the gift items with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The assessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries. The society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society did not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities. However, the Learned Commissioner of Income

ABHAY CHORDIA,JAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

bogus sales. During the assessment proceedings, the assessee submitted that the retail showroom at Jodhpur is approximately 1600 sq. feet in size and it is spread over three stories and there are approximately 9 to 10 employees besides the MOU correspondence. It has also been submitted that there is one billing counter on each floor. In this regard

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

bogus. He denied benefit u/s 80HHC of the Act. Further, he made addition of Rs. 70 lacs in the income u/s 68 of the Act. It was held that once the assessee has already included the amount of sale of Rs. 70 lacs in Profit and Loss Account and determined the income on that basis no further addition could

MOHAN LAL ASHOK KUMAR SARAF,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CEN CIR 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as indicated hereinabove

bogus only to give colour to non- genuine transaction as genuine transaction when all the transactions have been substantiated with purchase and sale register as well as stock register. 6. Because the L.d. CIT(A) has not accepted the contention of the appellant that it had changed its sales strategy in the later part of the FY 2015-16 whereby

UTTRAKHAND SAMAJ,JAIPUR vs. THE CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

purchased the gift\nitems with invoices, and most of the amounts were paid by cheque. The\nassessee also have photographs of the gift distribution to the beneficiaries.\nThe society did not provide any benefits to the trustees or members. The society\ndid not engage in any bogus activities. The society is running genuine activities.\nHowever, the Learned Commissioner of Income

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

purchases, amounting to Rs. 1,55,68,397/- was flagged on Insight portal for FY 2018-19 relevant to AY 2019-20 as per Risk Management Strategy of CBDT. 4.1 On the basis of above information, notice u/s 148A(b) was issued on 27.03.2023 and after considering the reply of the assessee, order u/s 148A(d) was passed

MOTHERS EDUCATION HUB,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

bogus or ingenuine, then the disallowance of the expenditure under s. 40A(2)(b) is not warranted in the absence of a definite finding that the payment made by the assessee is excessive or unreasonable in comparison to the fair market rent. In the case of MotilalLaxmichandSanghavi vs. Asstt. CIT (supra) the Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal has considered

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

bogus expenses and by\nusing the money of trust by taking the various advances. However, it is further cleared\nthat Honble Apex Court in three recent decision namely Ahmedabad developmental\nauthority 143 taxman 278, New Nobel Education 143 taxman 246, and Baba Banda\nBahadur Civil Appeal No. 10511 of 2013, had made remarkable change, where the theory\nof dominant objects