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)

200% in respect of excess claim of depreciation by not considering the submission made by assessee that effect of CIT(A) order in earlier year could not be given due to oversight, as depreciation was charged on the balances of fixed assets brought forward from earlier year (as is normal practice), however subsequently, mistake was rectified and fixed assets register

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

200) in respect of the same assels, once under section 35 and, again by way of depreciation under section 32). If and to the extent

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

200) in respect of the same assels, once under section 35 and, again by way of depreciation under section 32). If and to the extent

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

200) in respect of the same assels, once under section 35 and, again by way of depreciation under section 32). If and to the extent

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

200) in respect of the same assels, once under section 35 and, again by way of depreciation under section 32). If and to the extent

RAMBAGH GOLF CLUB,JAIPUR vs. ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

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

200) in respect of the same assels, once under section 35 and, again by way of depreciation under section 32). If and to the extent

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation in respect of fixed assets of the assessee. 9.1 Even otherwise Section 80 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 provides as under:- “80. Provision relating to Income Tax and Super Tax.- (1) For the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922), 4 the Board shall be deemed to be a company within the meaning

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation in respect of fixed assets of the assessee. 9.1 Even otherwise Section 80 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 provides as under:- “80. Provision relating to Income Tax and Super Tax.- (1) For the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922), 4 the Board shall be deemed to be a company within the meaning

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation in respect of fixed assets of the assessee. 9.1 Even otherwise Section 80 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 provides as under:- “80. Provision relating to Income Tax and Super Tax.- (1) For the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922), 4 the Board shall be deemed to be a company within the meaning

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation in respect of fixed assets of the assessee. 9.1 Even otherwise Section 80 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 provides as under:- “80. Provision relating to Income Tax and Super Tax.- (1) For the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922), 4 the Board shall be deemed to be a company within the meaning

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation in respect of fixed assets of the assessee. 9.1 Even otherwise Section 80 of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 provides as under:- “80. Provision relating to Income Tax and Super Tax.- (1) For the purposes of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (XI of 1922), 4 the Board shall be deemed to be a company within the meaning

M/S JINDAL ROADWAYS PVT. LTD.,NASIRABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

200 Shri Sanjay Jindal Vs ACIT with one anr. Less: Depreciation as per Companies Act F.Y. 2010-11 10524.29 F.Y. 2011-12 78083.79 F.Y. 2012-13 73976.92 F.Y. 2013-14 60852.23 (223437.23) 06-02-2014 WDV OF FLAT STAFF QUARTER 13,73,762.77 06-02-2014 Sale proceeds 47,00,000.00 31-03-2014 Profit on sale credited

SHRI SANJAY JINDAL,NASIRABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

200 Shri Sanjay Jindal Vs ACIT with one anr. Less: Depreciation as per Companies Act F.Y. 2010-11 10524.29 F.Y. 2011-12 78083.79 F.Y. 2012-13 73976.92 F.Y. 2013-14 60852.23 (223437.23) 06-02-2014 WDV OF FLAT STAFF QUARTER 13,73,762.77 06-02-2014 Sale proceeds 47,00,000.00 31-03-2014 Profit on sale credited

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)

Section 194 and 200 were challenged. It was noted in P. RatnakarRao and others V. Govt. Of A.P. and others (1996 (5) SCC 359) that the discretion given under Section 200(1) to the State Government to prescribe maximum rates for compounding the offence is not unguided, uncanalised and arbitrary. It was, inter alia, held as follows: ……………….. ………………. It is indisputable

ACIT, KOTA vs. SHIV AGREVO LTD., BARAN

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

200 has established that the expression occurring in Section 36(1)(iii) is wider in scope than the expression occurring in Section 57(iii). Thus, meaning thereby that the scope for allowing a deduction under Section 36(1)(iii) would be much wider than the one available under section 57(iii). This phrase, as held by many legal pronouncement

BANSAL CLASSES PVIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

section 32 of the Act at half the normal rate being used for less than six months. The assessee has submitted that the major construction work of the building was completed in September 2009 and thereafter, certain furniture and fixtures/installed were finished by December 2009 and the building was put to use. In support, the construction account of the building

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