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

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(3) but later on disallowed by rectification order for which we came in this appeal. As per past history & depreciation claimed & allowed to us, we enclosed herewith the complete details & accordingly also there is no revenue loss ultimately & specially when we are covered in Highest slab of tax @30% every years& hence we have also not gained

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

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)

190, 191 (Guj). For the purpose of section 150, so 17 Shri Vimal Chand Surana HUF as to enable the authority to issue the notice under section 148 at any time without being curtailed by the time-limit prescribed under section 149, there must be satisfaction of the ingredients under Explanation 2 to section 153. The first ingredient is that

M/S. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

depreciation disallowed on catalyst. 10. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 461 & 575/JP/2015 for the A.Y. 2011-12 at page 12 para 21 as under :- “21. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and the earlier

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

depreciation disallowed on catalyst. 10. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 461 & 575/JP/2015 for the A.Y. 2011-12 at page 12 para 21 as under :- “21. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and the earlier

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

depreciation disallowed on catalyst. 10. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 461 & 575/JP/2015 for the A.Y. 2011-12 at page 12 para 21 as under :- “21. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and the earlier

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

depreciation—Mistake that is proposed to be rectified is dependent on the question whether the machinery used for production of safety razor blades can be said to be part of "Iron & Steel Industry" and can come within category (b) mentioned hereinafter—This requires interpretation of the expression "other machinery and plant"—This is surely a question which requires, firstly

RAM SWAROOP MEENA,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

section 153A/143(3), 1961, vide order dated 23rd Dec. 2011. While framing the assessment, the assessing officer made two addition of Rs. 2,92,190/- and 7,30,000/- treating the income from other sources and on account of unexplained investment. Thus, computed income of Rs. 20,48,190/- against the income declared by the assessee

SHRI ARJUN SINGH ,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

190 Taxman 406 (Ker) the question raised in appeal filed by the Revenue was “whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the assessee’s claim for depreciation of earth moving equipment, namely, JCB at the rate of 40%; the rate provided for ‘Motor Buses, Motor Lorries, Motor Taxis, used in the business of running them on hire” and as such

WHEATONS DESIGN PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT / DCIT, CIRCLE -6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Due Date Of Hearing.”

depreciation allowance or any other allowance under this Act has been 5 Wheatons Design Pvt. Ltd. Jaipur. computed’. Thus the instant case is deemed to be a case where income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for AY 2014-15. Accordingly, after recording reasons to believe and obtaining necessary approval from the competent authority, the AO issued notice under section

RAM NIWAS MODI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are disposed off\nthereby allowing the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

190-\n192). There being no obligation on the part of the appellant to apply for continuation of\nregistration at that point of time, such an observation by the Ld. CIT(E) is contrary to the\nfacts of law. Otherwise also, the Ld. CIT(E) has completely ignored the statutory\nrequirement mandated upon him u/s 12AB(4)(II) that before cancelling

SUBHASH CHAND SAINI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD, BEHROR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

190/- filed on 28.03.2018. The assessee has declared income from business or profession for the year under consideration. The case was selected through CASS under scrutiny with remarks “ (i) cash deposit during the year”. Notice u/s 143(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961 was issued on 14.08.2018 fixing the case for hearing on 29.08.2018. Further notice

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. M/S SHREE AGENCIES PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, the ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

section 32(1) cannot be claimed by someone having no real connection with the assets and the claimant must be one with much more than some threads of right. Depreciation is claimable by the owner 5 ACIT, Kota Vs. Ms Shree Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Kota who uses the assets in question. Therefore, depreciation and other expenses claimed by the assessee

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(2), JAIPUR

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

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) on 17/12/2007, the Assessing Officer made certain additions/disallowances and assessed the total income at Rs. 6,42,850/-. On further appeal by the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) allowed part relief. Aggrieved with the additions/disallowances partly sustained by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

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

190 5. CIT vs VGP Foundation 262 ITR 187 (Mad.) 6. S.N. Namasivaym Chettiar vs CIT 38 ITR 579 (SC) 3.3 On the other hand, the ld.AR supported the order of the ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the ld.CIT(A) is justified in holding that while development fund is a capital receipt and it would not be added

SUBHASH PARETA,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are disposed off with above directions

depreciation following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in case of Jain Constructions and in respect of work executed through the sub-contractor, the AO has accepted the net profit of 3% as submitted by the AO during the course of assessment proceedings. Nothing has been brought on record to suggest the case of Jain

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

190, 215-230, 255-256, 287-288, 297-301 and 314-318) certain information were required from assessee. The assessee complied the notices/query letters by submitting its reply on various dates copy at ( copy

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

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

section 115BBE is not applicable. Reliance in this connection is placed on the following decisions:- Smt. Rekha Shekhawat Vs. PCIT (2022) 218 DTR 161 (Jaipur) (Trib.) In view of the fact that the unrecorded trade advances and cash in hand admitted during the course of survey u/s 133A emanated from and related to the real estate business carried