KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

80A(5), the claim\r\nfor only such in a return 139(4), 142(1) date contemplated deduction under section\r\n80P could be made by an assessee in a return filed within the time prescribed for\r\nfliling such returns under any of the above provisions. The amendment to section\r\n80AC with effect from 1-4-2018, however

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

SARAF EXPORT,CHURU vs. ACIT, JHUNJHUNU

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

80A and 80AB and Section 80B(5) and also Section 80HH(9). It may be noticed that the decision in Vishnu Oil and Dal Mills case (1996), 218 ITR 71 (Raj.) dealt with the question whether in computing the gross total income for the purpose of Chapter VI-A requires adjustments of unabsorbed carry forward loss or unabsorbed carry forward

SOYALA GRAM SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED,TONK vs. ITO, TONK, TONK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

80A(5) of the Income tax Act, 1961 4. That the appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter, withdrawn any of the grounds of appeal before hearing. 2. The appeal filed by the assessee is delayed by 26 days. The ld. A/R has filed condonation applications dated 28.08.2024 and 30.08.2024 along with an Affidavit of Shri Ram Narain, Secretary

BAJRANG WIRE PRODUCTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED,BAJRANG WIRE PRODUCTS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED vs. DCIT CIRCLE -4-JAIPUR, RJN-C-(104)(1), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

80A and 80AC of the Act allowed the claim of deduction of the assessee by holding that in order to claim such deduction; 6 Bajrang Wire Products (India) Pvt. Ltd, Jaipur. a. the return of income has to be furnished within the due date of furnishing the return as specified in section 139(1) of the Act; b. the accounts

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,BHIWADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

80a[Assessing] Officer, satisfactory, the value of the investments may\nbe deemed to be the income of the assessee of such financial year.\nFrom the perusal of this section, it is revealed that the section 69 is applicable\nwhen the assessee has made investments which are not recorded in the books\nof account. Here the assessee has disclosed this transaction

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

In the result, the both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

depreciation chart is available on paper book page no. 12. Hence the Learned CIT(A) has confirmed the addition without going thought the deprecation chart submitted by the Learned Assessing Officer. 3. Provision of section 69 is not applicable – The Learned Assessing Officer has made the addition under section 69 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The provision of section

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

Depreciation Claim v. Sales Turnover Mismatch vi. Other Deduction claimed vii. Refund Claim viii. Payment to related persons mismatch ix. Deduction under Chapter VI-A x. Deduction for scientific research xi. Other income not credited to P & L a/c xii. Mismatch in Income/Capital Gain on sale of land or building xiii. Loans/advance to related persons Consequently, a notice

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER

Depreciation Claim Sales Turnover Mismatch Other Deduction claimed Refund Claim Payment to related persons mismatch Deduction under Chapter VI-A Deduction for scientific research Other income not credited to P & L a/c Mismatch in Income/Capital Gain on sale of land or building Loans/advance to related persons Consequently, a notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued on 08.04.2016 electronically

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

Depreciation Claim v. Sales Turnover Mismatch vi. Other Deduction claimed vii. Refund Claim viii. Payment to related persons mismatch ix. Deduction under Chapter VI-A x. Deduction for scientific research xi. Other income not credited to P & L a/c xii. Mismatch in Income/Capital Gain on sale of land or building xiii. Loans/advance to related persons Consequently, a notice

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

section (6) to provide that, with effect from 1-4-2012, the provisions of sub-section shall cease to have effect. Accordingly, a SEZ developer or any entrepreneur carrying on business in an SEZ unit (being a company) would be liable to pay MAT on the profits arising from the development of SEZ or the business carried

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

80A(6) \n& Sec. 80IA(8)) were not urged. Hence considering these\nITA Nos. 489 to 492/JP/2023 \n ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. \n16\nadditional submissions and following arms’ length principles, it is \nhumbly prayed that Reliability Charge, at-least @ Rs. 1.50 per \nunit or mark up of 15% for each of the two distinct benefits be \nkindly allowed