RSD CONTAINERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

48 (SC) Pr. CIT v. NDR Promoters Pvt. Ltd. (2022) 138 taxmann.com 499 (SC) 7. Misplaced Reliance on Abhisar Buildwell (SC) Inapplicable The assessee's claim that reassessment under Section 147 is barred due to Abhisar Buildwell v. PCIT (SC) is wholly misplaced. Abhisar Buildwell dealt with Section 153A/153C, ie., search assessments, and held that additions unrelated to incriminating material

GHODAWAT HOTELS PVT.LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT(HQ), JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

section 48 r.w.s. 55 of the I.T. Act, 1961. In view of the above and respectfully following the judicial pronouncements as discussed above and relied upon by the assessee, we are of the considered view that the cost of the new asset which is provided to RFC on long term irrevocable lease against the vacation of assessee’s property from

COMPUCOM SOFTWARE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-VI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

section 143(3) of the Act. Now, examining the said claim of additional depreciation during the reassessment proceedings would therefore be a clear case of change of opinion. On this ground as well, the reassessment proceedings cannot be held valid in law.” 7. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court in the case

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)

48]. In terms of Section 45 of Income Tax Act, Long Term Capital Loss of Rs. 25,80,63,017/-has been computed on such assets after considering indexation benefit. In terms of provisions of Section 115JB(5) and as held in Best Trading And Agencies Ltd. -vs- DCIT (IT'A No. 191/2011 dated 26-08-2020)(Karn. HC), gain

LAL CHAND MEENA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD 7-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

48, the amount recorded in the books of account of the firm, association or body as the value of the capital asset shall be deemed to be the full ITA No. 515/JP/15 Lalchand Meena, vs. ITO, Ward 7(3), Jaipur value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset.” 11. The object

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)

section 32(1) would mean double deduction, which is not permissible in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Escorts Ltd. v. Union of India [1993] 199 ITR 43/[1992] 65 Taxman 420. The depreciation being notional expenditure will not fall under the expression 'actually applied' as held by the Apex Court in the case

MAHAVEER YADAV,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

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

48, the fair market value of the asset on the date of such conversion or treatment shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset." 27. We do not find that the income tax authorities and the Tribunal committed any error in applying Section

FEDERATION OF RAJASTHAN TRADE AND INDUSTRY,JAIPUR vs. ITO-EXEMPTION WARD-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

depreciation of Rs.1,00,525/- for the year under consideration. The assessee society has also declared sale proceeds of building amounting of Rs.61,00,000/- and declared capital loss of Rs.50,450/- under this head. 4 Federation of Rajasthan Trade & Industry 3.1 The ld. AO noted that details were called-for from the assessee relating to receipts, applications and long

M/S RAJASTHAN RAJYA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD.,VIDYUT BHAWAN, JAN PATH, JYOTI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, , JAIPUR

In the result,the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

depreciation does not amount to revaluation of asset. It is only a change in the allocation of the cost of asset to its useful life. Therefore, this amount cannot be added in computing the book profit. As far as not allowing deduction of Rs.15,85,10,128/- on account of provision for bad & doubtful debt written back is concerned

RAJ KUMAR KANDOI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed with no orders as to costs

depreciation [section 32(2)]. (iv) Any other expenditure (not being a capital expenditure) expended wholly and exclusively for the purpose of earning of such income. 8 RAJ KUMAR KANDOI VS ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR The case of the assessee is covered in point no. (iv). Hence the addition made by the AO deserves to be deleted. Clauses

HINDUSTAN SALES INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 55(2)(b). The reference of 31.03.2005 in your notice is misplaced. During assessment proceeding vide submission dated 3 October, 2018 (P.B.: 6 to 8), it was submitted that the value appearing in the Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2005 (P.B. : 46 to 48) was Rs. 1,57,730/- wherein one year depreciation

PRADEEP VATRANA,ALWAR vs. DCIT, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

48, the fair market value of the asset on the date of such conversion or treatment shall be deemed to be the full value of the consideration received or accruing as a result of the transfer of the capital asset." 27. We do not find that the income tax authorities and the Tribunal committed any error in applying Section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. M/S SHREE AGENCIES PVT. LTD., KOTA

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

section 32(1) cannot be claimed by someone having no real connection with the assets and the claimant must be one with much more than some threads of right. Depreciation is claimable by the owner 5 ACIT, Kota Vs. Ms Shree Agencies Pvt. Ltd., Kota who uses the assets in question. Therefore, depreciation and other expenses claimed by the assessee

DCIT, C-6, JAIPUR vs. GOVERDHAN PRASAD SINGHAL, JAIPUR

depreciation claimed on that building. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in directing to computing notional rent an old unusuable house on ratio laid down in the case of M/s. 3 Assessment Year 2017 Assessment Year 2017-18 AnsalHousing Finance and Leasing Ltd. by the Hon’ AnsalHousing

GOVERDHAN PRASHAD SINGHAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT, JAIPUR

depreciation claimed on that building. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in directing to computing notional rent an old unusuable house on ratio laid down in the case of M/s. 3 Assessment Year 2017 Assessment Year 2017-18 AnsalHousing Finance and Leasing Ltd. by the Hon’ AnsalHousing

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:-

Section 48 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Society Act, 2001 and these are charge on the net profit of the bank hence, the same should be allowed. It was further submitted that every year, 1% of the profit is transferred to the Co-operative Education & Training Fund which fund is to be utilized for the Education and Training of Officers

DYNAMIC POWERTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

depreciation, if any, under any provision of section 32, except clause (iia) of sub-section (1) of the said section, determined in such manner as may be prescribed. From the perusal of the above provision, it can be concluded that the company who has opted to file its return of income u/s 115BAA of the Act cannot take the deduction

METAL EXTRUSION INDIA LTD,JAIPUR vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: : Shri Vijay Pal Raovk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No.163/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year : 2015-16 Cuke M/S. Metal Extrusion India Ltd. The Addl. Cit Vs. 36A, Suraj Nagar East, Civil Lines Circle – 1 Jaipur Jaipur Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aafcm 3410 Q Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent

48, be deemed to be the full value of the consideration. The question before us is, what could be the full value of sale consideration i.e. whether the value on which stamp duty was paid at the time of sale deed or the value declared in the sale agreement ? In such a situation where the assessee is not satisfied with