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

SHRI RAMESH KUMAR GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 145(3) of the Act. It was further submitted that the NP during the year has declined on account of freight and cartage, commission expenditure, depreciation and interest on sales tax demand. Regarding freight and cartage of Rs. 547,461/-, it was submitted that the same is incurred in respect of supplies made to GWSSB and the same

SHRI VISHNU KUMAR BHARGAVA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Time Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

depreciation which were debatable and were disallowed in quantum proceedings. However, in an appeal from the order levying penalty, the CIT(A) took the view that merely because the claim was debatable and was disallowed by the revenue authorities, would not ipso facto convert the declaration made by the assessee into a non-declaration or the particulars into incorrect particulars

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

MOHD. CONST. CO.,KOTA vs. ADDL. CIT, KOTA

section 145(3) are clearly applicable in the case of assessee. As regards application of the profit rate, it may be mentioned that the assessee is carrying out such business with heavy utilization of capital assets and that is the reason that the depreciation claim of the assessee is for Rs.34,31,532/-. Due to such capital investment, the assessee

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

Section 40(a)(ia) provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are generally allowed under the general section. The computation u/s.29 has to be made u/s.145 on the basis of books of account regularly maintained by the assessee which the Assessing Officer did by estimating the profit at 5% of the sales. The learned Counsel

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

RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORP. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, both set of cross appeals for the respective assessment years are disposed off with above directions

depreciation allowed by the AO at Rs. 2,00,000/- is also to be added back in the computation of income as per the first appellate order. We Rajasthan State Industries Development & Investment Corp. Ltd. concur with the view of Ld. CIT(A) which also finds support from the decisions of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in jthe case

INTEGRAL URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Us. In This Appeal, The Assessee Bank Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

depreciation, if any, is required to be provided for in the accounts. The latest guidelines of the RBI may be referred to for allowing any such claims.” 8. Further, reliance was placed on the Coordinate Bench decision in case of M/s Nagaur Urban Co-operative Bank Ltd. vs. ACIT (in ITA No. 240/Jodh/2013 dated 04.02.2013) wherein on the same issue

M/S. JAIPUR TAX WEAVING PARK LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Her.”

depreciation in future years. 13. In the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals & Fertilzers Ltd. v/s CIT (227 ITR 172) (SC), there was no issue before the Hon'ble SC regarding connection of the income earned inextricably with the borrowed funds and hence it was verdicted that interest on surplus funds during Pre operation period is liable to be taxed separately

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: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention That The Revenue Has Assailed The Appeal In Ita No.453/Jp/2024 On The Following Grounds; “(I) Whether On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Deleting The Addition Of Rs.43,33,606/- Without Appreciating The Fact That Assessee Has Shown Bogus Purchase Of Rs 1,73,34,424/- During The Year From A Bogus Concern. 3

depreciation. The return was processed u/s 143(1) and no notice u/s 143(2) was issued. Thereafter AO after approval from competent authority- initiated reassessment proceedings by issue of notice u/s 148 on 28-03- 2019 after recording reasons. As the revenue was having the information which was received from Commissioner of Income-tax-1, Jaipur vide his office letter

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