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 10,77,958/- only on the basis of suspicious without making any enquiry from the assessee. The 30 ITA NO.414.JPR/2025 SYLVAN GREEN PRIVATE LTD VS DCIT,CIRCLE-6 , JAIPUR nature of subsidy received by the assessee is in the form of VAT Exemption given by the Himachal Pradesh State Government to promote establishment

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

M/S GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,TELANGANA vs. PCIT 2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation was examined u/s 143(3), thus the\naction of ld PCIT (Admin) in raising doubts to the settled issue is an attempt to\nunsettle the past history and such direction deserves to be struck down.\n5. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case ld. PCIT (Admin) has\ngrossly erred in holding the assessment order as erroneous

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUBHASH CHANDRA BANKA, JAIPUR

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

xviii) Ledger A/c of Creative Financial Services Pvt.\nLtd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.52 (xix) Ledger A/c of M/s\nTushar (India) Pvt. Ltd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.53 (xx)\n16\nITA No. 301 and others /JP/2025 & CO No. 2 and others-JP-2025\nDCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others\nLedger A/c of Creative Financial

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

xviii) Ledger A/c of Creative Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.52 (xix) Ledger A/c of M/s Tushar (India) Pvt. Ltd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.53 (xx) 16 ITA No. 301 and others /JP/2025 & CO No. 2 and others-JP-2025 DCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others Ledger A/c of Creative Financial

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

xviii) Ledger A/c of Creative Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.52 (xix) Ledger A/c of M/s Tushar (India) Pvt. Ltd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.53 (xx) 16 ITA No. 301 and others /JP/2025 & CO No. 2 and others-JP-2025 DCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others Ledger A/c of Creative Financial

MANGI LAL KANDOI ,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE – 2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

xviii) it is observed that the disclosure in the instant case of the appellant has been made during the course of search on the basis of incriminating documents found and seized, as mentioned supra. Further the fact also remains that these entries/transactions reveal the undisclosed advances made by the appellant from his undisclosed income and since the appellant could

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. TRILOK DEWAN, SIKAR

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

xviii) Ledger A/c of Creative Financial Services Pvt.\nLtd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.52 (xix) Ledger A/c of M/s\nTushar (India) Pvt. Ltd. appearing in books of Vaibhav Banka Page No.53 (xx)\n\n16\nITA No. 301 and others /JP/2025 & CO No. 2 and others-JP-2025\nDCIT vs. Vaibhav Banka and others\n\nLedger

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CC-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

2. As submitted before the Ld. TPO through various submissions, the gross level margin earned by the appellant is computed at 15.43% which falls within the arm's length range i.e. 11.49% to 19.78% of the comparable set of 31 companies and even higher than the median of the comparable set, computed at 14.84%. - 3. Further, even at net level

TIRUPATI COLLEGE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

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

section. The said proviso reads as under: "Provided also that where the fund or institution referred to in sub-clause (iv) or trust or institution referred to in sub-clause (v) is notified by the Central Government 1 [or is approved by the prescribed authority, as the case may be,] or any university or other educational institution referred

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

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

Bench: Him.

section 69B of the Act. This section reads as under:- "Amount of investments, etc., not fully disclosed in books of account. Amrapali Jewels Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 69B. Where in any financial year the assessee has made investments or is found to be the owner of any bullion, jewellery or other valuable article, and the Assessing Officer finds that

PADAM KUMAR GOYAL,TONK vs. ITO WARD-TONK, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, TONK

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

xviii) As per facts on record, during the course of inquiry by Investigation Wing, summons u/s 131 were duly sent to the appellant at his Kekri address and Deoli address, but he failed to make compliance. During the course of assessment proceedings, the appellant was specifically required to explain the deposits with supporting evidences, but he failed to furnish necessary