ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

239/- Total Rs. 8, 29, 75,428/- Therefore, it is held that the assessee has utilized borrowed funds for making the above-mentioned investments in its group companies and no commercial expediency was involved in making these investments. Accordingly, disallowance of Rs. 8, 29, 75,428/- is made out of interest paid on borrowed funds. k). as mentioned in para

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

239/- Total Rs. 8, 29, 75,428/- Therefore, it is held that the assessee has utilized borrowed funds for making the above-mentioned investments in its group companies and no commercial expediency was involved in making these investments. Accordingly, disallowance of Rs. 8, 29, 75,428/- is made out of interest paid on borrowed funds. k). as mentioned in para

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

239/- Total Rs. 8, 29, 75,428/- Therefore, it is held that the assessee has utilized borrowed funds for making the above-mentioned investments in its group companies and no commercial expediency was involved in making these investments. Accordingly, disallowance of Rs. 8, 29, 75,428/- is made out of interest paid on borrowed funds. k). as mentioned in para

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

239/-\nRs.8, 29, 75,428/-\nTherefore, it is held that the assessee has utilized borrowed funds for making the\nabove-mentioned investments in its group companies and no commercial\nexpediency was involved in making these investments. Accordingly, disallowance\nof Rs.8, 29, 75,428/- is made out of interest paid on borrowed funds.\nk). as mentioned in para 5 above

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

239/-\nRs.8, 29, 75,428/-\nTherefore, it is held that the assessee has utilized borrowed funds for making the\nabove-mentioned investments in its group companies and no commercial\nexpediency was involved in making these investments. Accordingly, disallowance\nof Rs.8, 29, 75,428/- is made out of interest paid on borrowed funds.\nk). as mentioned in para 5 above

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 gain, without appreciating material facts of the case.” 8. In support of the appeal of the revenue and to substantiate the view taken by the ld. CIT(A) the ld. AR of the assessee submitted an application under rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 for admission of additional evidence. The contention the application is reproduced here in below

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 gain, without appreciating material facts of the case.” 8. In support of the appeal of the revenue and to substantiate the view taken by the ld. CIT(A) the ld. AR of the assessee submitted an application under rule 29 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 for admission of additional evidence. The contention the application is reproduced here in below

JAGDISH KUMAR ARORA,BHAWANIMANDI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE- KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 69 cannot be invoked and the sundry debtors has to be treated as business or profession income of the assessee. Admittedly, in the present case, no existence of evidence in relation to any unaccounted independent identifiable other investment which was found during the course of survey. It is also admitted fact the appellant admittedly is engaged in business from

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

SMT. MANJU AGRAWAL,BHARTPUR vs. ITO, BHARTPUR

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

section 68 of the Income Tax Act by treating the Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares as unexplained cash credit is hereby directed to be deleted. 2. (Rajasthan High Court) DBIT No.209/2018 PCIT v. Pramod Jain Dt. of Order 24.07.2018 wherein the issue has been decided in favor of the assessee and against the department that the tribunal

MAHESH KUMAR AGRAWAL HUF,BHARTPUR vs. ITO, BHARTPUR

In the result, the ground no

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

section 68 of the Income Tax Act by treating the Long Term Capital Gain on sale of shares as unexplained cash credit is hereby directed to be deleted. 2. (Rajasthan High Court) DBIT No.209/2018 PCIT v. Pramod Jain Dt. of Order 24.07.2018 wherein the issue has been decided in favor of the assessee and against the department that the tribunal

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)

gain on sale of “UTI Transportation and Logistics Fund under section 10(38), and by investment of Rs 1,99,000/- which was made from owned funds as assessee was having availability of ample of owned funds. So, no borrowing cost has been incurred towards purchase of this UTI TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTICS FUND and other investments which may generate exempt

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

239 CTR (Bom) 183 : (2011) 52 DTR (Bom) 71\n: (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) concurred with.\nThe very basis of initiation of proceedings for which reasons to believe were\nrecorded were income escaping assessment in respect of items of club fees, gifts\nand presents, etc., but the same having not been done, the AO proceeded to\nreduce the claim

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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

239 CTR (Bom) 183 : (2011) 52 DTR (Bom) 71\n: (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) concurred with.\nThe very basis of initiation of proceedings for which reasons to believe were\nrecorded were income escaping assessment in respect of items of club fees, gifts\nand presents, etc., but the same having not been done, the AO proceeded to\nreduce the claim

JAI DEEP SINGH,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

capital gain of Rs.87,91,732/- against which deduction u/s 54B was claimed. Considering the same, the AO assessed the income of HUF u/s 143(3) vide order dt.07.12.2009 by accepting the declared income. Thus, when assessment has already been completed/s 143(3), then reopening the case on same issue beyond four years amounts to change of opinion which

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

239 CTR (Bom) 183 : (2011) 52 DTR (Bom)\r\n71 : (2011) 331 ITR 236 (Bom) concurred with.\r\nThe very basis of initiation of proceedings for which reasons to believe were\r\nrecorded were income escaping assessment in respect of items of club fees,\r\ngifts and presents, etc., but the same having not been done, the AO proceeded

ACIT, NCR BUILDING, JAIPUR vs. HANS RAJ AGARWAL, VIDHYADHAR NAGAR JAIPUR

39. In view of the above discussion and findings, memorandum of cross objections No 1/JP/2025 filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

capital gain arisen on the sale of shares of Yamini Investments and the appellant each time replied to the same and provided each and every detail related to the transaction. The details of the notices issued by the revenue and reply to the same by Appellant are tabulated as under: S. no. Notice date Reply date