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)

250 of the Act does not prescribe a mandatory time limit for disposal of appeals. If the power claimed by the CIT(A) in the present case were valid, he could pass directions in the year 2030 instructing the AO to initiate reassessment proceedings for the present assessment year. Such a direction would enable the AO to reopen assessments long

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)

250 of the Act does not prescribe a mandatory time limit for disposal of appeals. If the power claimed by the CIT(A) in the present case were valid, he could pass directions in the year 2030 instructing the AO to initiate reassessment proceedings for the present assessment year. Such a direction would enable the AO to reopen assessments long

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

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

250 of the Act does not prescribe a mandatory time\nlimit for disposal of appeals. If the power claimed by the CIT(A) in the present\ncase were valid, he could pass directions in the year 2030 instructing the AO\nto initiate reassessment proceedings for the present assessment year. Such a\ndirection would enable the AO to reopen assessments long

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

250.\n2.9 The power to issue directions in the manner exercised by the Id. CIT(A) in the\npresent case is clearly unwarranted and impermissible under the scheme of Act.\nIf such power to issue binding directions for assessment under Sections 153C\nread with Section 150 were to be vested in the hands of the CIT(A), it would lead

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)

250 was passed by Ld. CIT(A) in the case of assessee company on 26.09.2024, which stood served on the e-portal of the assessee company. Against the order so passed, appeal could have been filed within 60 days, from the service of the order. However, the appeal got delayed by 84 days, as the appeal was filed

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)

section 250 of Income Tax Act by the Ld Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) without providing the proper opportunity of being heard, is contrary to the principles of natural justice and equity and liable to be quashed. 2.1 Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of manufacturing Kraft Paper in the State

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

depreciation allowance or any other\nallowance, as the case may be, for the assessment year concerned (hereafter in\nthis section and in sections 148 to 153 referred to as the relevant assessment year):\nProvided that where an assessment under sub-section (3) of section 143 or this\nsection has been made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SNEHLATA AGARWAL, SIKAR

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

250. The assessment was completed under Section 153A\nvide order dated 21.09.2021, determining the total income at Rs.73,84,060. This\nresulted in an addition of Rs.42,20,814, which included:\n\na. Disallowance of long-term capital gains exemption of Rs.40,15,061.29 by\ntreating the sale of listed equity shares as a bogus transaction; and\n\nb. Addition

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

250 of the Income Tax\r\nAct 1961 [ for short Act ]dated 27.05.2025 for the assessment year 2019-\r\n20. Ld. CIT(A) passed that order because the assessee had challenged\r\nassessment order dated 27.02.2024 passed under section 147r.w.s.144\r\nread with section 144B of the Act by National Faceless Assessment Unit of\r\nIncome Tax Department [ for short

HINDUSTAN SALES INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation the same is added back while computing the capital gain. The building was old and minor construction was of no use and therefore, the AO has considered it being very minor amount. Relying on the judgement of Hon’ble Madras High Court the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that deprecation asset along is 19 HINDUSTAN SALES INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION

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. 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

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

ANAMIKA CONDUCTORS PVT. LTD. ,JAIPUR vs. ACITDCIT, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

7. In view of the above reasons and findings, this appeal deserves to be allowed

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

250 of the Act. 2.5 Learned CIT(A) upheld the observation by the AO that the assessee had claimed depreciation of Rs.3,23,689/- twice i.e. once while computing deduction u/s 80IA of the Act and then while calculating total taxable income. Holding that the assessee was not entitled to claim depreciation on same set of assets twice, Learned

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

250.\n2.9 The power to issue directions in the manner exercised by the Id. CIT(A) in the\npresent case is clearly unwarranted and impermissible under the scheme of Act.\nIf such power to issue binding directions for assessment under Sections 153C\nread with Section 150 were to be vested in the hands of the CIT(A), it would lead

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 250 of the Shree Cement Limited, Beawar. IT Act for the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds raised by the assessee and revenue are as under :- 1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (Appeals) was not justified and erred in rejecting the appellant’s claim of allowing reliability charge

HOLIDAY TRIANGLE TRAVEL PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

250 of the Act is bad in law and liable to be quashed to the extent it dismisses the Appellant’s appeal filed on 20 January 2017 against the impugned order. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in conferring the additionof INR 5,289.920 on account

BARMER LIGNITE MINING CO. LTD.,C-SCHEME, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

250 of the Income\nTax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act') for A.Ys. 2016-17 to 2018-19 & 2020-21.\nThe revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:-\nIn ITA No. 452/JP/2023\n1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A)\nhas erred in upholding the assessee's claim for Mines