DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. M/S VISION ESTATES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital gain is chargeable on its compulsory acquisition. 2. The appellant Pvt. Ltd. company before submitting the ground- wise submissions, the appellant submits the following undisputed facts of the case:– (i) That during the course of search and seizure action carried under section 132 of the IT Act by the Department no incriminating document was found and/or seized

DEPUTY COMMISSINER OF INCOME TAX, LIC BUILDING vs. M/S GEE VEE DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed

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

capital gain is chargeable on its compulsory acquisition. 2. The appellant Pvt. Ltd. company before submitting the ground- wise submissions, the appellant submits the following undisputed facts of the case:– (i) That during the course of search and seizure action carried under section 132 of the IT Act by the Department no incriminating document was found and/or seized

SHIVA CORPORATION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DY. CIT, CC-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Section 2(14).\nIt is well-settled that certification must be specific and unambiguous.\nMere absence of municipal tax collection or cultivation use is not\nsufficient to escape capital gain liability.\nIV. On Misplaced Reliance on Case Laws:\nIn Anthony John Pereira (2020) 115

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

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

Section 153C of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Search and seizure - Assessment of any other person (Validity of) - Assessment year 2007- 08 - In appellate proceedings, Tribunal recorded a finding that satisfaction for initiation of proceedings under section 153C was recorded by Assessing officer on 02-02-2015 - Tribunal thus opined that Assessing Officer could not have initiated and passed

ITO, WARD-1, BHARATPUR vs. SHRI MADAN LAL SHARMA, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed statistically and

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

Capital Gains, eligible to tax, in the hands of the assessee. 3.3. Even ld. AO, in his remand report, submitted to the ld. CIT(A) accepted the fact that the property was never transferred to the assessee. In this regard, the remand report of the ld. AO, reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) at Page 5-6 of his order

SHRI MADAN LAL SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, , BHARATPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is allowed statistically and

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

Capital Gains, eligible to tax, in the hands of the assessee. 3.3. Even ld. AO, in his remand report, submitted to the ld. CIT(A) accepted the fact that the property was never transferred to the assessee. In this regard, the remand report of the ld. AO, reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) at Page 5-6 of his order

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

115 JB of the Act. This issue has been decided by the coordinate bench in assessee's own case for A Y 2014-15 in assessee’s own case wherein Bench relying on the order of Safeflex International (Supra) held as under :- “18. The sub-section (5) to section 115JB has been subject matter of interpretation by the courts

SHRI RUPAL JAIAN,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Date Of Appeal.

section 10(38) of the Act and the relevant findings of the Coordinate Bench contained at Para 8 read as under:- "8. The assessee has earned speculation profit in the immediately preceding year through M/s Eden Financial Services also and the said profit has been used to purchase the shares of M/s Sunrise Asian Ltd. The assessee has offered

MACRO TOWNSHIP PVT LTD,288-289 MAHAVEER NAGAR DURGAPURA JAIPUR vs. DCIT CC-2 JAIPUR, LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

capital gains. 5.1 Ld CIT(A) further erred in law as well as on facts and circumstances of the case in not considering that the deeming provisions of Section 50C(1) of the Income Tax Act can never be applied to the appellant, therefore, the M/s. Macro Township Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. adoption of sale value in respect of property sold

MACRO TOWNSHIP PVT LTD,288-289 MAHAVEER NAGAR DURGAPURA JAIPUR vs. DCIT CC -2 JAIPUR , LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

capital gains. 5.1 Ld CIT(A) further erred in law as well as on facts and circumstances of the case in not considering that the deeming provisions of Section 50C(1) of the Income Tax Act can never be applied to the appellant, therefore, the M/s. Macro Township Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. adoption of sale value in respect of property sold

MACRO TOWNSHIP PVT LTD,288-289 MAHAVEER NAGAR DURGAPURA JAIPUR vs. DCIT CC -2 JAIPUR, LIC BUILDING JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

capital gains. 5.1 Ld CIT(A) further erred in law as well as on facts and circumstances of the case in not considering that the deeming provisions of Section 50C(1) of the Income Tax Act can never be applied to the appellant, therefore, the M/s. Macro Township Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. adoption of sale value in respect of property sold

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.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

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.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

115 JB of the Act. This issue has been decided by\nthe coordinate bench in assessee's own case for A Y 2014-15 in\nassessee’s own case wherein Bench relying on the order of\nSafeflex International (Supra) held as under :- \n“18. The sub-section (5) to section 115JB has been subject matter\nof interpretation by the courts

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER

115 JB of the Act. This issue has been decided by the coordinate bench in assessee's own case for A Y 2014-15 in assessee’s own case wherein Bench relying on the order of Safeflex International (Supra) held as under :- \n“18. The sub-section (5) to section 115JB has been subject matter of interpretation by the courts

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)

capital gain. M/s. AU Small Finance Bank Limited & Avas Financiers Limited 4.4 The ld. PCIT also noticed that the provision of section 43D was not applicable in assessee's case, being NBFC. In the financial statements, NPA was not categorized and depicted as per the norms laid down in RBI's master direction i.e. into substandard assets, doubtful assets

CAREER POINT LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Section 14A is not in accordance with the provisions of section14A/Rule 8D. Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of PCIT, Bangalore vs. Subramanya Constructions & Development Co. Ltd. [2021] 130 taxmann.com 115 (Copy at PB page 209-212) has held that where investments had been made by assessee from capital and reserves and not out of borrowed funds

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

115 CCH 0026 KolHC Reassessment—Reopening of\nassessment—Assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.\nNIL—Return was processed under Section 143 (1—A survey was conducted\nfrom which it was found that assessee has deposited money with NIL—It was\nfurther seen that said company is a specified person of assessee—According to\nAssessing Officer