PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

income earned from Sitapura\nSEZ Unit I from assessment year 2010-2011 till assessment year 2019-2020.\n1.5. That M/s. Pinkcity Colourstones Pvt. Ltd., Mahapura Link Road, Jaipur was\nmainly in the business of manufacturing of Colored Gem Stones till the FY\n2005-06 relevant to AY 2006-07 and the accumulated losses till AY 2006-07\nwere

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

income surrendered by the assessee during the survey on account of discrepancy in cost of construction of building, discrepancy in stock and discrepancy in advances and receivables would be considered as business income and not as deemed income under section 69.” • In the case of Bajaj Sons. Ltd., the Hon’ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT, ITA No. 1127/CHD/2019, has stated

SUPREME BUILDESTATES PVT LTD,MADANGANJ- KISHANGARH vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2 AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Income from Business and Profession" to those, who pursue corporate social responsibility projects under following sections. Section 30 provides deduction on repairs, municipal tax and insurance premiums. Section 31, provides deduction on repairs and insurance of plant, machinery and furniture. Section 32 provides for depreciation

SAVITRI LEASING FINANCE LTD,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 4(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

depreciation has been claimed on 12 SAVITRI LEASING FINANCE LTD VS ITO, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR the building from where rental income is received. The computation of income is as under which was attached with the return of income. Income from business

ADITYA CEMENT,BEHROR vs. ITO, BEHROR

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

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

business premises of the assessee. During survey, on account of certain discrepancies found in stock, cash, etc. the assessee surrendered an income of Rs.52,86,885/-. The assessee paid advance tax on the surrendered income and filed its ITR showing the amount surrendered as “Income from other sources”.It then went on to claim set off of depreciation

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO WARD 4(2)), JAIPUR

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

Business & Profession which shows that this issue M/s. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. was already examined during the assessment proceedings and during the course of assessment proceedings the ld. AO was in conscious view that no deemed rental should be taxed on unsold offices held as stock in trade. In this regard the reliance is placed on the following

KRISHNA BUILD HOME PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: The Learned Ao, The Reassessment Proceeding Is Illegal, Bad In Law, Without Jurisdiction & Is Based On Wrong Facts & On Change Of Opinion & In Gross Violation Of Proviso To S. 147 Of The It Act, Which Says No Action Can Be Taken M/S. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.

Business & Profession which shows that this issue M/s. Krishna Build Home Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. was already examined during the assessment proceedings and during the course of assessment proceedings the ld. AO was in conscious view that no deemed rental should be taxed on unsold offices held as stock in trade. In this regard the reliance is placed on the following

YUWAM EDUCATION PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

business & profession. 19 Yuwam Education Pvt. Ltd. Jaipur vs. DCIT 2. The Ld. CIT(A) at Para 4.2, Pg 14 to 31 after discussing the evidentiary value of the statement recorded during survey, validity of the retraction and the various case laws with reference to the same, at Pg 30 of the order held that retraction made from the statement

JAIPUR TELECOM PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

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

depreciation is concerned, it is submitted that assessee was holding certain house properties and rental income therefrom was being shown under the head “Income from house property” till A.Y. 2012-13. W.e.f. Assessment Year 2013-14, assessee started showing rental income as “Business

JAIPUR TELECOM PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

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

depreciation is concerned, it is submitted that assessee was holding certain house properties and rental income therefrom was being shown under the head “Income from house property” till A.Y. 2012-13. W.e.f. Assessment Year 2013-14, assessee started showing rental income as “Business

NATWAR LAL SHARDA,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

business activity and interest income. The ld. AO has sustained of Rs. 15,34,28,700/- which was surrendered during the survey under the head of income from other sources on gross basis i.e. without allowing any depreciation

M/S R.G. COLONIZERS PVT. LTD. ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 136/Jp/2021 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2014-15 M/S R.G. Colonizers Pvt. Ltd., Cuke D.C.I.T., 4, Tirupati Trade Centre, S.C. Vs. Circle-3, Road, Jaipur. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aaacr 8269 D Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri P.C. Parwal (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/02/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 04/04/2022 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 06/08/2021 For The A.Y. 2014-15, Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken. “1. The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Rejection Of Books Of Account By Applying The Provisions Of Sec. 145(3). 2. The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Action Of Ao In Applying N.P. Rate Of 8% On Total Receipts Of Rs. 18,63,73,549/-, Thereby Computing The Business Income At Rs. 78,42,549/- (18,63,73,549*8%-70,67,877 Depreciation) As Against Net Loss Of Rs. 68,43,810/- Computed By The Assessee)

business income at Rs. 78,42,549/- (18,63,73,549*8%-70,67,877 depreciation) as against net loss

URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST (NOW KOTA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY),KOTA vs. DCIT (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

business. 7. Whether Ld. CIT(A) is justified in allowing deduction from the amount of Rs. 908.46 lakhs under the head receipts from land regularization and conversion and Nagariya Kar (Lease Rental) considering the same as share of receipts payable to the other parties and holding that the same do not partake the character of income of the assessee

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE , JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, KOTA

In the result, the assessee’s income is found to be not chargeable under the Income Tax Act at all and the AO is directed to delete the additions made, irrespective of the head of income

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalacit, Exemption, Circle, Jaipur ...... Appellant Vs.

business. 7. Whether Ld. CIT(A) is justified in allowing deduction from the amount of Rs. 908.46 lakhs under the head receipts from land regularization and conversion and Nagariya Kar (Lease Rental) considering the same as share of receipts payable to the other parties and holding that the same do not partake the character of income of the assessee

M/S. GANPATI GLOBAL PRIVATE LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD1(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

business activities of the assessee the same cannot be said in the resent case where the utilisation of various assets of the company and the payments received for such utilisation are directly linked with the activity of setting up the steel plant of the assessee. These receipts are inextricably linked with the setting up of the capital structure

CHANDRA MOHAN BADAYA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

depreciation, interest on car loan, etc., however,\nas per the provision of section 44AD (6)(ii) of the act, income\nderived in the nature of commission or brokerage is not liable to be\noffered under section 44AD. Accordingly, assessee was asked to\nexplain why the brokerage income should not be considered as\nincome from other sources, vide order sheet entry

M/S RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.,VIDYUT BHAWAN, JAN PATH, JYOTI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, , JAIPUR

In the result,the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

business income. In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, we do not concur with the findings of the ld. CIT(A). Hence, the Ground No. 3 of the assessee is allowed. 5.1 Apropos Ground No. 4 of the assessee, brief facts of the case are that the AO on perusal of note 30.1 (related to depreciation

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. AMRAPALI JEWELS PVT. LTD. , JAIPUR

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

Bench: Him.

income of the assessee at Rs. 176,78,18,453/- after allowing the business loss and unabsorbed Depreciation. 4. Aggrieved