M/S GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED,TELANGANA vs. PCIT 2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 263 can be exercised only when both the\nfollowing conditions are satisfied (i) the order of the Assessing Officer\nshould be erroneous, and (ii) it should be prejudicial to the interests of\nthe Revenue. These conditions are conjunctive. An order of assessment\npassed by the Assessing Officer should not be interfered with only\nbecause another view is possible

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

section 263 of the Act. The assessment order is set aside and restored\nto the file of Assessing officer to examine the issues in the light of the\nobservation made in this order after allowing reasonable opportunity to the\nassessee.\n5. Feeling dissatisfied with the finding recorded by the Id. PCIT, Central,\nJaipur in an order passed u/s. 263

GIRNAR SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,6TH FLOOR, JAIPUR TEXTILE MARKET, B-2, NEAR MODEL TOWN, MALVIYA NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. PCIT – 2, JAIPUR, NEW CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

263 of the Act proposing to modify the assessment order stating it to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on account of the following issues: • Disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (“Rules”) • Deduction of tax at source on matching the expense debited in profit

M/S. ALOKIK STEELS PVT. LTD VILLAGE POST-PATAN, TEHSIL-KISHANGARH, DISTRICT-AJMER,KISHANGARH vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

depreciation of Rs. 1,92,40,180/-. 4. That thereafter the ld. PCIT issued a notice dated 29.11.2018 u/s. 263 of the Act wherein it was alleged that the ld. Assessing Officer has not considered the above two aspects relating to surrender made before the Central Excise authorities during the course of assessment proceeding and thus the assessment order dated

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. PR.CIT, , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 04/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Cement Limited, Cuke Pr.Cit, Vs. Bangur Nagar, Post Box No. 33, Udaipur. Beawar. Pan No.: Aaccs 8796 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Dilip Desai (Ca) Shri Vijay Shah (Ca) Shri Mohit Choudhary (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pcit, Udaipur Dated 03.02.2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – Udaipur, (Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Pr. Cit) Was Not Justified In Initiating Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Since The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue.

section 263 brought by the Finance Act, 2015 is effective from 01-06-2015 and does not operate retrospectively. (Para 7, Pg. 6) (3) Identical principle also held in Indus Best Hospitality & Realtors Pvt. Ltd. –vs.- PCIT [ITA No. 3125/Mum/2017 dated 19-01-2018] (Para 23, Pg. 10) Without prejudice to the above submissions that proceedings u/s 263 are invalid

RAWAT BAL VIDHA NIKETAN SAMITTEE,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

263 cannot be made to\nuncover evidence on a supposed / hypothetical basis, particularly\nwhen the information that was available was specific and additions to\nbe made in this year will be merely based, if at all, on the basis of\nprojection in future/ estimation. This kind of approach is not\nacceptable in the courts of law, pleads the assessee

AYUB ALI,CHURU vs. PCIT-3, JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Pcit On Which No Adverse Finding Was Given.”

section shall extend [and shall be deemed to have extended] to such matter as had not been considered and decided in such appeal." Since the matter for which proceedings u/s 263 of the Act has been initiated cannot be in question in appeal as the AO has allowed incorrect deduction to the assessee and what has been incorrectly allowed

KARUNA JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 2(1), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, grounds raised by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

depreciation amounts only. It only substantiate that the company was merely a paper company and the rise in share price were due to human intervention only. Conclusion: Therefore the reasons of this astronomical price rise were located somewhere else and certainly could not be related to the fundamentals or any hypothetical promising future of the company by any stretch

M/S JAIPUR TELECOM PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PR. CIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.274/JPR/2021 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years :2014-15 M/s Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 3, Amrapali Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. cuke Vs. Pr.CIT-2, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 0763 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Manish Agarwal(C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 15/02/2

section 263 of the Income Tax Act. Hence, the assessment order is set aside on the determination of book profit u/s 115JB and calculation of MAT as per law to be redone afresh de novo in the light of the observation made in this order and with direction to the Assessing Officer to verify and examine the claim made

INDIA COMMERCIAL SERVICES ,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

263, alleging the Assessing Officer's (AO) order was erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue concerning unsecured loans, disallowance of Section 80G deduction, and depreciation

AKHIL MODI,JAIPUR vs. PR. CIT, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

263 of the Act pertaining to A.Y 2015-16. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 30.09.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 2,58,75,800/- which was selected under CASS for limited scrutiny and thereafter, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 29.12.2017 wherein income

KATH BROTHERS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 69.” • In the case of Bajaj Sons. Ltd., the Hon’ble Chandigarh Bench of ITAT, ITA No. 1127/CHD/2019, has stated as under: “The AO has not pointed out any unexplained credit in the books of account, any unexplained investment, any unexplained money, bullion or jewellery, any unexplained expenditure or any amount of loan repaid in the assessment order

M/S. RAJENDRA AND URSULA JOSHI SKILL DEVELOPMENT P. LTD,JAIPUR vs. PR.CIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Us.

depreciation has been charged on the same for the financial year 2014-15." It is important to ascertain the previous year if any income is to be assessed under the head income from business or profession. The previous year is defined in section 3 as under: "For the purpose of this Act, "previous year" means the financial year immediately preceding

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

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

263 if at all, and in the presence of such specific\nprovisions, a similar power is not available to the first appellate authority.\nThus, Id. CIT(A)'s direction in question squarely violates this principle and\nhence should be set aside.\n2.7.viii. Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Kolkata in the case of ITO Wd-1(2)\nHgl

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

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

263 of the IT\nAct and quash the same.\"\n(Emphasis supplied)\n(b) Smt. Meena Baldua vs. ITO in ITA No. 872/JP/2018 vide order dated\n08.03.2019 (Jaipur ITAT)\nHence, we hold that the reasons recorded by the AO based on incorrect\nfact is not sustainable in law and liable to be quashed. Since, we quashed\nthe reopening being invalid

JAIPUR ENGINEERING COLLEGE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

263 of the Act. Being aggrieved by the said order, the revenue preferred these two appeals”. On these facts the Hon’ble High Court in para 11 held as under:- “With regard to second and third substantial questions of law are concerned, reading of section 13(l)(d) of the Act makes it clear that it is only the income

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)

263 if at all, and in the presence of such specific provisions, a similar power is not available to the first appellate authority. Thus, ld. CIT(A)’s direction in question squarely violates this principle and hence should be set aside. 2.7.viii. Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Kolkata in the case

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)

263 if at all, and in the presence of such specific provisions, a similar power is not available to the first appellate authority. Thus, ld. CIT(A)’s direction in question squarely violates this principle and hence should be set aside. 2.7.viii. Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Kolkata in the case

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

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

263 if at all, and in the presence of such specific\nprovisions, a similar power is not available to the first appellate authority.\nThus, Id. CIT(A)'s direction in question squarely violates this principle and\nhence should be set aside.\n\n2.7.viii.\nHon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Kolkata in the case of ITO Wd-1(2)\nHgl