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

WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CEIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the IT Act for the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds raised by the assessee as well as revenue are as under :- 1. That the ld. AO grossly erred on law and facts in referring the matter with TPO by invoking section 92CA of I.T. Act, 1961 and the ld. CIT (A) also erred in not considering

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS OM METALS SPML INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD), JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the IT Act for the assessment year 2014-15. The grounds raised by the assessee as well as revenue are as under :- 1. That the ld. AO grossly erred on law and facts in referring the matter with TPO by invoking section 92CA of I.T. Act, 1961 and the ld. CIT (A) also erred in not considering

BAJRANG WIRE PRODUCTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BAJRANG WIRE PRODUCTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT CIRCLE -4-JAIPUR, RJN-C-(104)(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2018-19. The said order of the ld. CIT (A), NFAC arises against the order 16.03.2021 passed under section 2 Bajrang Wire Products (India) Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur. 143(3) read with sections 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by ITO National e-Assessment Centre, Delhi

LOVELY PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER, AJMER

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

Bench: him regarding non mentioning of Document Identification Number (DIN) in the body of the order u/s. 127 of the Act dated 08-09-2021 and various other technical pleas raised in grounds of appeal regarding validity of notice u/s. 148 of the Act, thereby appellate order passed by the CIT(A) is non-speaking order and deserves to be quashed. 4. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the AO erred in issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Act as it was a search related case u/s. 132 r/w

250 of the Act, itself states that CIT(A) order should be a speaking order. Moreover, it is the consistent opinion of the various courts that first appellate authority always pass order considering each and every please / grounds of appeal. However, in our case, CIT(A) passed the order dated 19-10-2023 without commenting such ground of appeal / technical

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)

6. That the Ld AO has seriously erred in law and facts of the case, being proceedings initiated u/s 147/148 not complied the provisions of the Act amended by the Finance Act 2021, though the notice is served on or after 01 April 2021 7. The Ld AO had seriously erred in adding Subsidy received Rs. 7186388 as business income

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

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

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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. NISHA JAIN, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

250/-. Therefore, the ld. AO cannot blow hot and cold in the same breath now. 3. It is submitted that S. 44AB of the Act has been inserted by the Finance Act, 1984 (21 of 1984), with effect from 01.04.1985, i.e., for and from assessment year 1985-86. The object behind this is explained in circular no. 387, dated

CHANDRA MOHAN BADAYA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

depreciation, interest on car loan, etc., however,\nas per the provision of section 44AD (6)(ii) of the act, income\nderived in the nature of commission or brokerage is not liable to be\noffered under section 44AD. Accordingly, assessee was asked to\nexplain why the brokerage income should not be considered as\nincome from other sources, vide order sheet entry

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. 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. 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

M/S RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.,VIDYUT BHAWAN, JAN PATH, JYOTI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, , JAIPUR

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

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

depreciation as on 31.03.2015 is to the extent of Rs.2034.40 crore. Providing financial help by the Government to these companies also cannot be a reason for not allowing the claim of bad debt. 5. The claim of bad debts is allowable u/s 36(1)(vii) which reads as under:- “subject to the provisions of sub-section (2), the amount

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

FEDERATION OF RAJASTHAN TRADE AND INDUSTRY,JAIPUR vs. ITO-EXEMPTION WARD-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

6) That the Ld. Commissioner Appeals has grossly erred in not allowing the opportunity of personal hearing on 29.12.2023 considering the fact that the Notice U/s 250 was issued to file the written submission on or before 28.12.2023 and further passed the order on 29.12.2023 as such rule of principle of natural justice has not been followed. 7) The Humble

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

250/- and claiming that he had the above amount to fund the car. Presently, as per information under Section 133(6) collected by AO from Bird Automotive Pvt. Ltd., from which the vehicle was purchased. Bird Automotive confirmed the sale of the car to the assessee company the total value of the car was Rs. 40,96,817. Of this

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,BHIWADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

250/- and claiming that he had the above amount\nto fund the car. Presently, as per information under Section 133(6) collected by\nAO from Bird Automotive Pvt. Ltd., from which the vehicle was purchased. Bird\nAutomotive confirmed the sale of the car to the assessee company the total value\nof the car was Rs.40,96,817. Of this, Rs.16

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