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

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

255 ITR 220 (P&H)\r\nand Travancore Cements Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 219 CTR (Ker) 359 : (2008)\r\n305 ITR 170 (Ker) held no longer good law.\r\nThe heading of s.147 is \"Income escaping assessment\" and that of s.148\r\n\"Issue of notice where income escaped assessment\". Sec. 148 is\r\nsupplementary and complimentary to s.147

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER

Section 80IA (8) of the Act. In CIT vs. Thiagarajar Mills Ltd. in Tax Case(Appeal) Nos.68 to 70 of 2010 dated 07-06-2010, it was held that captive consumption of power generated by the assessee from its own power plant would enable the assessee to derive profit and gains by working out the cost of such consumption

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 145(3). 28.7. Assessee has also provided details of 2 comparable companies where their profit had also shown a reduction in AY 2012-13. CRISIL data also revealed that the entire industry was suffering. Assessee's entries in the books are based on invoice. Agents and dealers billed same rate to assessee. Further, the downward fall in gross profit

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

section 145(3). 28.7. Assessee has also provided details of 2 comparable companies where their profit had also shown a reduction in AY 2012-13. CRISIL data also revealed that the entire industry was suffering. Assessee's entries in the books are based on invoice. Agents and dealers billed same rate to assessee. Further, the downward fall in gross profit

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 145(3). 28.7. Assessee has also provided details of 2 comparable companies where their profit had also shown a reduction in AY 2012-13. CRISIL data also revealed that the entire industry was suffering. Assessee's entries in the books are based on invoice. Agents and dealers billed same rate to assessee. Further, the downward fall in gross profit

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

255 (Rajasthan)[19-03-2024] and Tirupati\nConstruction Company v. Income-tax Officer [2024] 165 taxmann.com 176\n(Rajasthan)/[2024] 465 ITR 611 (Rajasthan)[21-03 2024].\n2. Direction given beyond jurisdiction:\n2.1 The provisions concerning the jurisdiction and power of Ld.CIT(A)/JCIT(A)\nare contained in section 250 and 251 which reads as follows:\n34\nITA Nos.709/JP/2025\nDCIT

SHRI MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 5(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the ground no

depreciation, telephone/mobile exp. (Ground of Appeal No. 4), staff members birthday celebration (Ground of Appeal No. 5). 2. That in above regard it is respectfully submitted that any expenditure not specifically covered by sections 30 to 36 is deductable u/s. 37. An analysis of section 37(1) shows that any expenditure (not being expenditure of the nature described in sections

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

255 and claim various expenses\nunder the head, depreciation, interest on car loan, etc., however,\nas per the provision of section

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. KEDIA BUILDERS AND COLONIZERS PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the revenue are stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961.” 5.5. The appellant submitted that the AO has satisfied himself that appellant had taken accommodation entry in the shape of unsecured loans. The appellant submitted that it raised objections before AO against such reasons wherein it was categorically contended that appellant had not taken any unsecured loans from any of the party mentioned

MO. SHARIPH KURESHI,SIKAR vs. ITO WARD-4 SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

255 ITR 220 (P&H) and Travancore Cements Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 219 CTR (Ker) 359 : (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker) held no longer good law. The heading of s. 147 is "Income escaping assessment" and that of s. 148 "Issue of notice where income escaped assessment". Sec. 148 is supplementary and complimentary

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

255 Taxman 152 (SC) (paper book pg. no.\n192-195), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as below:\n“13) ... However, a bare perusal of notice dated 09.03.2004 which was issued in the\noriginal assessment proceedings under Section 143 makes it clear that the point on\nwhich the re-assessment proceedings were initiated, was well considered in the\noriginal

RAJIV GANDHI VIDHYA PITH SHIKSHA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION W(1), JAIPUR

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

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

depreciation or otherwise in respect of any asset, acquisition of which has been claimed as an application of income under this section in the same or any other previous year. 3.4 Sub-Section (6) of Section 11 was inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act,2014 w.e.f. 1.4.2015. This has been ratified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal

OM INFRA LIMITED,JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, we find no substantial question of law being involved in this appeal

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

255] Del) 10 Om Infra Limited vs. DCIT, Central Circle-01, Jaipur Section 154, object of.- The provisions of section 154 are meant to rectify an apparent error committed by the Assessing Officer. They cannot be sought to be invoked to rectify an error committed by the assessee while filing the return of income [Mold-Tek Plastics Lid. v. Deputy

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

255 ITR 220 (P&H) and Travancore Cements Ltd.\nvs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 219 CTR (Ker) 359 : (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker) held no\nlonger good law.\nThe heading of s.147 is \"Income escaping assessment\" and that of s.148 \"Issue\nof notice where income escaped assessment\". Sec. 148 is supplementary and\ncomplimentary to s.147. Sub-s. (2) of s.148 mandates

INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

255 ITR 220 (P&H) and Travancore Cements Ltd.\nvs. Asstt. CIT (2008) 219 CTR (Ker) 359 : (2008) 305 ITR 170 (Ker) held no\nlonger good law.\nThe heading of s.147 is \"Income escaping assessment\" and that of s.148 \"Issue\nof notice where income escaped assessment\". Sec. 148 is supplementary and\ncomplimentary to s.147. Sub-s. (2) of s.148 mandates

M/S. GANPATI GLOBAL PRIVATE LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD1(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

255, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held as under:- “5. In our opinion the Tribunal has misconstrued the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals (supra) and that of Bokaro Steel Ltd. (supra). The test which permeates through the judgment of the Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals (supra