ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation actually allowed to him under the Act. In the instant case Explanation 2 to clause (6) of section 43 is relevant and is reproduced hereunder : ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer " Explanation 2.—When any capital asset is transferred by a hold ing company to its subsidiary company or by a subsidiary company to its holding

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation actually allowed to him under the Act. In the instant case Explanation 2 to clause (6) of section 43 is relevant and is reproduced hereunder : ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer " Explanation 2.—When any capital asset is transferred by a hold ing company to its subsidiary company or by a subsidiary company to its holding

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. M/S. AJMER VIDHYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD., AJMER

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

depreciation actually allowed to him under the Act. In the instant case Explanation 2 to clause (6) of section 43 is relevant and is reproduced hereunder : ACIT v M/s Ajmer Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd., Ajmer " Explanation 2.—When any capital asset is transferred by a hold ing company to its subsidiary company or by a subsidiary company to its holding

ACIT, ALWAR vs. M/S PRIME CHEM OIL LTD.,, ALWAR

depreciation of Rs 141,950. 14. It would therefore be relevant to firstly examine the issue in respect of two bogus entries of Rs. 13,60,000/- received on 16.12.1998 from M/s Moon Holding & Credit Ltd., and Rs. 3,00,000/- received on 15.03.1999 from Subh In Fin Caps Ltd., New Delhi which forms the subject matter of notice under

BANSAL CLASSES PVIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. JCIT, KOTA

In the result, revenue’s ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Section 80G does not require that the donation should be for commercial expediency. Most of these things are required for allowing deduction of business expenditure u/s 37 of the I.T. Act. Considering the facts, it is held that assessee has fulfilled all the conditions necessary for claiming deduction u/s 80G. The AO is therefore directed to delete addition

M/S. GURU KRIPA CAREER INSTITUTE PVT. LTD.,SIKAR vs. PR.CIT-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

depreciation on computer and furniture and vehicle running expenses, advertisement expenses v) Abnormal increase in Cash in hand post survey vi) Outstanding liabilities in sundry creditors for advertisement and rent expenses and staff payable vii) Alleged non-verification of construction in building and non-reconciliation of trial balance viii) Alleged non-application of provisions of section 68 to 69D read

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

depreciation disallowed on catalyst. 10. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 461 & 575/JP/2015 for the A.Y. 2011-12 at page 12 para 21 as under :- “21. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and the earlier

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

depreciation disallowed on catalyst. 10. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 461 & 575/JP/2015 for the A.Y. 2011-12 at page 12 para 21 as under :- “21. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and the earlier

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

depreciation disallowed on catalyst. 10. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in ITA Nos. 461 & 575/JP/2015 for the A.Y. 2011-12 at page 12 para 21 as under :- “21. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties, perused the material available on the record and the earlier

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

section 12AA as a charitable entity undertaking educational activity and thus qualify as an eligible entity for receiving contributions from the assessee society. The contribution of Rs 3,86,84,912 is made by the assessee society out of income generated during the year under consideration as apparent from the return of income and computation of income available

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

350/- on account of rejecting the books of account and on the basis of re-casted income and expenditure account without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances and in law of the case, the ld. Lower Authorities grossly erred in denying the exemption benefits to the assessee appellant trust

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

350/- on account of rejecting the books of account and on the basis of re-casted income and expenditure account without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances and in law of the case, the ld. Lower Authorities grossly erred in denying the exemption benefits to the assessee appellant trust

JCIT, RANG-2, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED, KOTA

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation at the rate of 60% on the equipment which could be classified as computer and at the rate of 15% on the equipment which could be classified as plant and machinery. This issue is accordingly set aside to the file of the AO for re- adjudication in accordance with law and our observation above". Respectfully following the decision

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

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

depreciation at the rate of 60% on the equipment which could be classified as computer and at the rate of 15% on the equipment which could be classified as plant and machinery. This issue is accordingly set aside to the file of the AO for re- adjudication in accordance with law and our observation above". Respectfully following the decision

SHRI VIKRAM SINGH SHEKHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

depreciation under this head or come under the general head of plant and machinery. But in view of the language used it appears that it cannot be said that it is an obvious and apparent mistake which is self-evident and does not require either a process of argument or investigation. If that is the position in law then, proceedings

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. VIMAL CHAND SURANA HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

350 ITR 131 (Guj.) In the reasons recorded by Ld. A.O. there is no whisper that “due to failure on the part of assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment” the income has escaped assessment and, therefore the notice issued u/s 148 is wrong and bad in law and Ld. A.O. CIT (A) has rightly

ACIT, AJMER vs. ABHISHEK KUMAWAT, KISHANGARH

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

350 (Raj.). In that case, even though the decision were rendered in the context of section 68, to our mind the same is equally relevant for facts under consideration even though the assessee has not maintained books of accounts and the AO has not invoked section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMENR vs. SMT. SUDARSHNA SOMANI, KISHANGARH

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

350 (Raj.). In that case, even though the decision were rendered in the context of section 68, to our mind the same is equally relevant for facts under consideration even though the assessee has not maintained books of accounts and the AO has not invoked section 68 specifically in the instant case. The Hon’ble High Court has observed