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

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

355(Jp), has also held\nthe same view copy of order is enclosed\n(g) Also refer latest decision of this Honble ITAT in the case of Pappu Qureshi v/s\nITO in ITA No. 314//Jp/2019 dt. 28.04.2020\nSec. 292B is no applicable: S. 292B could not be invoked to correct a\nfoundational/substantial error as it was meant

AGRASEN MEDICAL RELIEF & RESEARCH SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. ITO(E), WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1026/JPR/2025 निर्धरणवर्ष / AssessmentYear : 2016-17 Agrasen Medical Relief & Research Society Central Spine, Sector -7, Vidhyadhr Nagar Jaipur - 302 039 (Raj) बनाम Vs. अपीलार्थी / Appellant स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAATA 7540F The ITO (E) Ward - 1 Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby :Shri P.C.Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudh

355 Corpus donation 30,19,100 Total receipts available for application 94,99,455 Application of income: - i. Revenue expenses as per I&E A/c 62,37,417 excluding depreciation ii. Capital expenditure as per Fixed assets 21,09,490 schedule Total application 83,46,907 Percentage of application 87.87% From the above it can be noted that assessee

RAMA SHANKER PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD NO. 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

355(Jp), has also held\nthe same view copy of order is enclosed\n(g) Also refer latest decision of this Honble ITAT in the case of Pappu Qureshi\nv/s ITO in ITA No. 314//Jp/2019 dt. 28.04.2020\nSec. 292B is no applicable: S. 292B could not be invoked to correct a\nfoundational/substantial error as it was meant

MAYA KUMARI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

355(Jp), has also held the same view\ncopy of order is enclosed\n(g) Also refer latest decision of this Honble ITAT in the case of PappuQureshi v/s ITO in\nITA No. 314//Jp/2019 dt. 28.04.2020\nSec. 292B is no applicable: S. 292B could not be invoked to correct a\nfoundational/substantial error as it was meant

PRADEEP KUMAR,JHUJHUNU vs. ITO WARD -2, JHUJHUNU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

355(Jp), has also held the same view copy of order is enclosed (g) Also refer latest decision of this Honble ITAT in the case of Pappu Qureshi v/s ITO in ITA No. 314//Jp/2019 dt. 28.04.2020 Sec. 292B is no applicable: S. 292B could not be invoked to correct a foundational/substantial error as it was meant

RAM NIWAS MODI CHARITABLE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are disposed off\nthereby allowing the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

depreciation and 44.48% with\nDepreciation (Pg. 12 of CIT order). Thus, such a huge amount of profit was found\nobjectionable. Again the Id. CIT at pg. 13 of the order has taken the figures from the\ncase of CIT vs Queen's Education Society (Uttarakhand high court), the profit margins\nwere 0.84% and 7.5% only. Thus, when this factual aspect

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.”

355 • Baby Memorial Hospital Ltd. Vs. ACIT 111 taxmann.com 189. 12. Per contra, the ld. CIT/DR vehemently argued the matter and taken us through the findings of ld Pr CIT which reads as under:- “5. I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case and also examined the case records along with written submission filed by the assessee before

KAILASH CHAND,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD, BEHROR, BEHROR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Depreciation and Interest on loan) and further w.r.t. Balance sheet, 1 item under Assets (being addition in fixed asset of truck) and 1 item under Liabilities (being expense payable). The approach adopted by the ld. AO itself is based on cherry picking which is not tenable under the eyes of law in as much as the AO felt satisfied with

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

355 ITR 290 (Guj).\"\nRecently the ITAT, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in case of Vijay Kedia (HUF) Vs. ACIT\n(ITA No. 197 & 248/JP/2016) decided on 29-01-2018 held as under: -\n“We further noted that when the corresponding sale is not in dispute then the\nquestion is only regarding the correct amount of purchases and verification of the\nsame

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SUNDER DAS SONKIYA, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

depreciation. The return was processed u/s 143 (1) and no notice u/s 143 (2) was issued. Thereafter Ld. A.O. initiated reassessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s 148 on 28-03-2019 after recording following reasons: “Your letter dated 11.04.2019 wherein you have requested to provide grounds of reasons for opening the case. In this regard, I am submitting