LAL CHAND MEENA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7-3, JAIPUR

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

section 45. The effect of this amendment is that profits and gains arising from the transfer of a capital asset by a partner to a firm shall be chargeable as the partner’s income of the previous year in which the transfer took place. For purposes of computing the capital gains, the value of the asset recorded in the books

M/S BALAJI CONSTRUCTION,AJMER vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2, AJMER

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation @ 50% was to be allowed. (vi) That the power under section 154 can be invoked only to correct an error & not to disturb a concluding finding given in scrutiny assessment made under 7 M/s Balaji Construction/ Dinesh Choudhary vs. ACIT section 143 (3

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)

depreciation provided by Rs 1077958.00, only on the basis of suspicious without making any enquiry from the assessee. The nature of subsidy received by the assessee is in the form of VAT Exemption given by the Himachal Pradesh State Government to promote establishment of new unit/expansion of existing unit in the state of Himachal Pradesh in such area (Baddi

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)

section 154 of the Act. 2 Aditya Cement, Alwar 2. That the Id. CIT(Appeal) erred in confirming the order passed by the Id. AO which was time barred by limitation, the order was passed after time limit provided in the Act. 3. That the Id AO has illegally rectified the order u/s 154 and made illegal addition

DYNAMIC POWERTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

3,17,05,251/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) by CPC vide intimation dated 22.12.2023, wherein the system treated the assessee company as having opted for taxation under Section 115BAA (which provides a concessional rate of tax but disallows certain deductions). As a result, the CPC disallowed the assessee company's claim under Section 10AA and raised

SHRI VIKRAM SINGH SHEKHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

section and investigation of certain facts cannot be rectified u/s 154 of the Act. In the present matter the Ld. AO disallowed the additional depreciation charged @ 20% on the machinery purchased during the year u/s 154 of the Act. The purchase of the machinery is not disputed. The matter was very well assessed u/s 143(3

DCIT, CC-2, JAIPUR vs. SHRI VIMAL CHAND SURANA(HUF), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

154 (Bom)held that “The basic postulate which underlines section 147 is the formation of the belief by the Assessing Officer that any income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for any assessment year. The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that such is the case before he proceeds to issue a notice under section 147. The reasons which

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

154 (Bom)held that “The basic postulate which underlines section 147 is the formation of the belief by the Assessing Officer that any income chargeable to tax has escaped ITA 437/JP/2017_ 7 DCIT Vs. Vimal Chand Surana (HUF) assessment for any assessment year. The Assessing Officer must have reason to believe that such is the case before he proceeds

INCOME TAX OFFICER , EXEMPTION, WARD, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

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

154, the appellant has withdrawn and added back ‘’provisions of expenses withdrawn’’ of Rs.s2,30,26,s342/- 8.2.2 In the original assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 27.03.2015, the A.O. had made an addition of Rs.2,30,26,342/- on account of disallowance of provision for the expenses. In the appeal before the CIT(A) vide order u/s 250 dated

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

section (6) to provide that, with effect from 1-4-2012, the provisions of sub-section shall cease to have effect. Accordingly, a SEZ developer or any entrepreneur carrying on business in an SEZ unit (being a company) would be liable to pay MAT on the profits arising from the development of SEZ or the business carried

RAMARPAN EDUCATION SOCIETY,,BHILWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, AJMER

In the result, appeal ITA No

3. Disallowed depreciation on block of fixed assets. 4. Depreciation of acquisition should be allowed.” The AO rejected the application of the appellant observing that “the issues raised by the assessee do not come under the purview of the provisions of Section 154

RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 154 of the Act.\nTherefore, after considering the above facts and position of the case, the\npresent rectification application cannot be accepted and accordingly\nrejected as the same lack merits\n3.\nAggrieved, from that order passed u/s.154 of the Act\nthe assessee filed an appeal before the Id. CIT(A). Apropos\nto the grounds so raised and after hearing

M/S GIE JEWELS,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

depreciation allowable in accordance with the provisions of section 32 as if no deduction under section 35AD was allowed in respect of the assets on which the deduction under that section is claimed.] (3) Every person to whom this section applies shall obtain a report, in such form as may be prescribed30, from an accountant, certifying that the adjusted total

M/S. GOLDEN TRIANGLE FORT & PALACE PVT. LTD., ,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

depreciation in terms of Section 32(2) of the Act from the current years business profit by invoking ITA 943/JP/2018_ 3 M/s Golden Triangle Fort & Palace P Ltd. Vs dCIT provisions of Section 154

DWARKADHEESH BATRA,ALWAR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A) – One Against The Order Passed

154 of the Act. Some of the issues are common in both the appeals which were decided by the ld. CIT (A), therefore, the possibility of the said confusion in the mind of the assessee cannot be ruled out. Further we find that filing the appeal belatedly the assessee would not achieve any ulterior purpose or any gain. Therefore, having

KIRAN INFRA ENGINEERS LTD.,JAIPUR vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: or at the time of hearing of

section 145(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against this order passed by ld.AO, assessee decided to file an appeal before CIT(A) wherein ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the rejection of the assessee’s books of accounts and invoking the provisions provided u/s 145(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred as the ‘Act”). However

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. PARADISE PROPERTIES, SAROJNI MARG, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

section 271. In view of the aforesaid provisions of Rule 46A(3), the Learned CIT(A), before taking into account the additional evidences furnished by the assessee allowed an opportunity to the Learned Assessing Officer by calling a remand report. The Learned Assessing Officer submitted remand report under letter dated 30 ITA No. 324/JP/2024 & CO No. 12/JP/2024 DCIT vs. Paradise

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)

3), Kolkata that they are Directors in the various companies which is controlled & managed by Mr. Anjani Banka. Statement of Mr. Anjani Banka was also recorded by the DDIT(Inv.), Unit-2(3), Kolkata on 29.03.2014 wherein he accepted that he is engaged in providing accommodation entries in form of share capital, unsecured loan, LTCG etc and to facilitate

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

3. The Ld. CIT(A) at Pg 36-37, Para 5.3 held that books of accounts of the assessee are not audited, assessee himself declared profit @ 8% u/s 44AD of the Act, AO found that actual turnover is more and therefore applied the rate of profit as per section 44AD, if the assessee wanted to show less profit he should