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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a) in an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

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

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

251 reads as follows :\n70\nPowers of the [Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the] Commissioner\n(Appeals).\n251. (1) In disposing of an appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall have the\nfollowing powers—\n(a)\nin an appeal against an order of assessment, he may confirm, reduce,\nenhance or annul the assessment:\n[Provided that where such appeal is against an order

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

depreciation on said rights. Hon'ble ITAT has referred that facts are similar to the facts for AY 2015-16 and the issue has been decided in favour of assessee in the very same order. It is pertinent to mention here this issue for AY 2015-16 was decided in view of the fact that identical issue has already been

OM INFRA LIMITED,JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ADIT (CPC) BANGALORE, BENGALURU KARNATAKA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 534 & 536/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20 & 2018-19 Om Infra Limited Om Tower, M. I. Road Church Road, Rajasthan cuke Vs. ADIT (CPC), Bangalore, Bengaluru, Karnataka LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACO 8245 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri B. V. Maheshwari (F.C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. A. S. Nehra

251(2) of IT Act was issued on 09.03.2023 to enhance the addition on account of PF/ESI to Rs. 81,16,761/- from the original addition of Rs. 41,89,576/-. The difference has been reconciled being the contribution of the employer. Therefore, no adverse inference is drawn. 6. As the assessee did not find any favor from the order

OM INFRA LIMITED,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ADIT (CPC) BANGALORE, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 534 & 536/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2019-20 & 2018-19 Om Infra Limited Om Tower, M. I. Road Church Road, Rajasthan cuke Vs. ADIT (CPC), Bangalore, Bengaluru, Karnataka LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAACO 8245 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri B. V. Maheshwari (F.C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. A. S. Nehra

251(2) of IT Act was issued on 09.03.2023 to enhance the addition on account of PF/ESI to Rs. 81,16,761/- from the original addition of Rs. 41,89,576/-. The difference has been reconciled being the contribution of the employer. Therefore, no adverse inference is drawn. 6. As the assessee did not find any favor from the order

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)

251/-. The return was processed under Section 143(1) by CPC vide intimation dated 22.12.2023, wherein the system treated the assessee company as having opted for taxation under Section 115BAA (which provides a concessional rate of tax but disallows certain deductions). As a result, the CPC disallowed the assessee company's claim under Section 10AA and raised a demand

PRINCESS INFRA & DEVELOPMENT LLP,KOTA vs. ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA , KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicate hereinabove

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

251(1)(a) of the Act is applicable in the instant case also. We are enclosing herewith an order passed by a CIT(Appeals), NFACfollowingthe similar provision It is therefore, most humbly requested to kindly set aside the assessment order dated 27.12.2019 and refer the case Back to assessing officer for making a fresh assessment and oblige.’’ 6. Ground

PRINCESS INFRA & DEVELOPMENT LLP,KOTA vs. ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicate hereinabove

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

251(1)(a) of the Act is applicable in the instant case also. We are enclosing herewith an order passed by a CIT(Appeals), NFACfollowingthe similar provision It is therefore, most humbly requested to kindly set aside the assessment order dated 27.12.2019 and refer the case Back to assessing officer for making a fresh assessment and oblige.’’ 6. Ground

ARJUN SINGH,KOTA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-I

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

depreciation aggregating to Rs. 22,77,188/- on the above assets. Had the case has not been scrutinized u/s 143(3) proceedings an amount of Rs. 22,77.188/- would have been escaped from taxation. 3.1.1. The position of law regard to levy of penalty u/s 271(1)c) has undergone a substantial change after the insertion of Explanation (1

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