SHRI DIGAMBER JAIN ATIKSHAYA KESHTRA,PADAMPUA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1, KAILASH HEIGHTS

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

127 com 78, where Hon’ble bench reversed the order of the Tribunal by observing as under: As per the Income-tax Act, income” means “net income”, which is taxable. Income from property should be computed as per sections 22 to 27 of the Act and the income from business have to be computed under sections

LOVELY PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

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

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

section 147 in the reason was typographical error, if considered correct, 46 Lovely promoters Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT non-observation of such serious typographical error by two senior officers i.e. (i) Range Head forwarding reason to approval authority with recommendation for approval and (ii) Pr. CIT, approving Authority. Non observation of such serious typographical error led to the conclusion that

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)

sections (4) to (10) and as increased by the applicable surcharge, for the purposes of the Union, calculated in the manner provided therein, shall be further increased by an additional surcharge, for the purposes of the Union, to be called the “Health and Education Cess on income-tax”, calculated at the rate of four per cent of such income

SYLVAN GREENS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

127 of the Income-tax Rules prescribing the mode of service of notice under the Act. The signing of notice would not amount to issuance of notice as contemplated under section 149 of the Act. In other words, the requirement of issuance of notice under section 149 is not mere signing of the notice under 17 ITA NO.414.JPR/2025 SYLVAN

CHURU ZILA SAHKARI BHOOMI VIKAS BANK LTD.,CHURU vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, JHUNJHUNU

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

127, Hari Marg, Civil Lines, Jaipur-302006. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCA 3585 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by: Shri G.M. Mehta (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 06/01/2022 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date

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

127 & 128/Jodh/2022 dated\n15-11-2022 wherein the claim of the assessee @15% has been\nallowed for uninterrupted power supply. The ld. AR of the assessee\npointed out that there in that case of the assessee had claimed\n15% premium on Grid rate wherein the present case, the assessee\nis claiming fixed rate of Rs. 1.50 per unit. We find

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

Section 14A of the Act can\nbe made if the assessee had not earned any exempt income? - HELD THAT:- A\nperusal of the Memorandum of the Finance Bill, 2022 reveals that it explicitly stipulates\nthat the amendment made to Section 14A will take effect from 1st April, 2022 and will\napply in relation to the assessment year

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. GOENKA JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, Ground No. 2 raised by the revenue is also dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalito, Ward 2(1), Jaipur ...... Appellant

section 127 of I.T. Act, 1961 vide his office order dated 10-12-2014 for completing the pending assessment. Due to change in incumbent fresh notice u/s. 142(1) of the Act dated 26-12-2014 was issued and served through speed post. In compliance of the same the assessee vide letter dated 04-09-2014 has intimated that return

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

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

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

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

Depreciation Claim v. Sales Turnover Mismatch vi. Other Deduction claimed vii. Refund Claim viii. Payment to related persons mismatch ix. Deduction under Chapter VI-A x. Deduction for scientific research xi. Other income not credited to P & L a/c xii. Mismatch in Income/Capital Gain on sale of land or building xiii. Loans/advance to related persons Consequently, a notice

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

127 & 128/Jodh/2022 dated 15-11-2022 wherein the claim of the assessee @15% has been allowed for uninterrupted power supply. The ld. AR of the assessee pointed out that there in that case of the assessee had claimed 15% premium on Grid rate wherein the present case, the assessee is claiming fixed rate of Rs. 1.50 per unit. We find

MAYA KUMARI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

127 of the Act by order issued by the Pr.CIT-\n1, Jaipur. Thereafter, notice under section 142(1) was issued on 09.11.2019 along\nwith the show cause under section 144 of the I.T. Act, 1961 fixing the case for\nhearing on 18.11.2019, which was served upon the assessee by hand. In response,\nthe assessee has uploaded written submissions and copy

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

127 of the Act, with DCIT, Central Circle-1 Jaipur by an order of the PCIT. Professional Automotives Private Limited vs. ACIT 6. The assessee is private limited company engaged in the Transportation of “Four Wheeler vehicles” throughout the country from the point of their manufacturer to the directed destinations. 6.1 The assessee filed regular return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SAPNA KARNANI, TONK PHATAK

In the result, the appeals of the revenue in ITA No

127 of the Act dated 29.11.2018 by the Pr. Commissioner of\nIncome tax-2, Jaipur.\nAccordingly, notice u/s 153A of the IT Act, 1961 for this year was\nissued on 29.05.2019 which was duly served upon the assessee. In\ncompliance to the notice u/s 153A of the Act, return of income was e-filed\non 25.06.2019 declaring total income

TIJARIA POLYPIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRLCE 4, JAIPUR

depreciation of Rs.1,90,73,215/-.\n2. Brief details of information collected/received by the AO: The information has\nbeen received from the ITO(Inv.). Unit 1 & AIU, Kolkata vide letter No. 9301 dated\n06.03.2018 in the case. As per credible information certain bank account\ntransactions appeared suspicious. The transactions appear to be circular nature\nand the account appears to have

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 5.5. The appellant submitted that the AO has satisfied himself that appellant had taken accommodation entry in the shape of unsecured loans. The appellant submitted that it raised objections before AO against such reasons wherein it was categorically contended that appellant had not taken any unsecured loans from any of the party mentioned

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)

127 of the IT Act, 1961 dated 28.12.2020. 3. The ld. AO i.e. ACIT Central Circle-3 Jaipur issued the notice u/s.142(1) on dt. 21.01.2021 with queries(PB62-65) . In response thereto the assessee has filed the reply(PB29-32) and details . The ld. AO also issued the notice u/s 142(1) on dt.08.09.2021(PB66) referring the notice dt.21.01.2021

BRAND INDIA REAL ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(1), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation on CPP was\nallowed by the AO while framing the assessment under Section 143(3) after conscious\nconsideration of the material on record. It is not even the case of the Revenue that the formation\nof the belief regarding the escapement of the assessment by the AO is based on any new material\ncoming on record. Apparently, the formation