LAXMAN NAINANI,KOTA vs. ACIT/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

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

Charitable Trust Vs. Union of India (1991) 100 CTR (Del) 160 and KhatauJunkarItd. Vs. K.S Pathania, Dy.CIT (1992) 102 CTR (Bom) 194 referred and reproduced in Modern Fibotex and also so opined by CBDT in its binding in Circular No. 581 dated 28.09.1990 reported in [1990] 186 ITR (St.) 2. Therefore, the law laid down

ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN URBAN DRINKING WATER SEWERAGE AND INFRASTRUCTURE CORPN LIMITED, TONK ROAD, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

charitable trust and a section 25 company of the Companies Act.Hence, it suggest that the learned AO has completely misunderstood the transaction and its purpose The assessee company prepares its financial statements as per the applicable accounting standards issued by ICAI and the books are audited by the Independent Chartered Accountancy firm, which is then supplementarily audited

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Charitable Trust [1987] 31 Taxman 335 /167 ITR 129\n(Raj.) wherein it was held as under:\n“The error envisaged by section 263 was not one which depended on\npossibility or the guess work but it should be actually an error either of\nfact or law. Unless the Commissioner categorically says that there was\nsome income from speculative business