SANJIV PRAKASHAN,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

iii) disallowance of loss claimed, if return of the previous year\nforwhich set off of loss is claimed was furnished beyond the due\ndate specified under sub-section (1) of section 139;\n(iv) disallowance of expenditure [or increase in income]\nindicated in the audit report but not taken into account in\ncomputing the total income in the return

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 32 of the Act as per prescribed rate of depreciation so provided in the Income tax Rules on such anicut facility in light of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred supra. 13 ITA NO. 201(6)/JP/2017 M/s. Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 71. Now, coming to various decisions relied upon by the ld AR. We have carefully

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 32 of the Act as per prescribed rate of depreciation so provided in the Income tax Rules on such anicut facility in light of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred supra. 13 ITA NO. 201(6)/JP/2017 M/s. Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 71. Now, coming to various decisions relied upon by the ld AR. We have carefully

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 32 of the Act as per prescribed rate of depreciation so provided in the Income tax Rules on such anicut facility in light of decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court referred supra. 13 ITA NO. 201(6)/JP/2017 M/s. Chambal Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd. 71. Now, coming to various decisions relied upon by the ld AR. We have carefully

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)

section 139(1). In this case, assesse has claimed depreciation on expenditure incurred in respect to acquisition of leasehold rights on land u/s 32(1)(ii) being business or commercial right of similar nature nor filed a revised return to claim depreciation on expenditure incurred in respect to acquisition of leasehold rights on land u/s 32(1)(ii) being business

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

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

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

iii) 'profit and gains of business or profession'; (iv) 'capital gains'; and (v) 'income from other sources'. In case of income derived under the head salaries, income from house property, capital gains and other sources, the provisions of section 32 are not applicable. Provisions of section 32, i.e., deprecation are, therefore, applicable in case of income earned under the head

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n“2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the prayers, we\nare of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in the form of\nreview which requires detail consideration at length looking into the\nimportance of the matter. Therefore

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

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

32-34) dismissed\nthe Revenue's Misc. Application by observing as under:\n\n\"2. Having gone through the averments made in the application and the\nprayers, we are of the opinion that the prayers sought can be said to be in\nthe form of review which requires detail consideration at length looking\ninto the importance of the matter. Therefore

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

Section 32(2)(iii) of I.T. Act, 1961 and so was not admissible. The\nassessee firm filed its explanation to object notice u/s 154 and claimed that said\nunabsorbed depreciation is allowable to it as per law and cited various judicial\nprecedents on the issue in its favour. The Ld. A.O. without appreciating the legal\nposition as pronounced in various