DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LTD, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

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

80P(2). In view of above, Ld. CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition and thus the ground of the department be dismissed.” Rajasthan Cooperative Dairy Federation Ltd. The ld. AR of the assessee in support of disallowance for ESI & PF also 9. filed additional written submission and same is reiterated in here in below: Further Submission

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

b) dt. 27.02.2023 | 1-4 |\r\n| 2. | Copy of notice/order u/s 148A(d) dt. 24.03.2023 | 5-16 |\r\n| 3. | Copy of IT return with computation of total income | 17-19 |\r\n| 4. | Copy trading P & L account and B/S | 20-23 |\r\n| 5. | Copy of objection and reply

SHRI MADHOPUR KRAYA VIKRAYA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,SHRIMADHOPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NEEM KA THANA, NEEM KA THANA

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

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

80P(2)(a)(iv) of the Act. The ld. AR for the assessee submitted that even ld. CIT(A) observed in its finding that it requires verification whether sales were made to non- members and if any sales have been made to non-members what is the proportionate profit on such sales may be disallowed from the deduction claimed. Therefore

OM INFRA LIMITED,JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, we find no substantial question of law being involved in this appeal

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

80P are similar to the provisions of s. 80-I. For arriving at such a view, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has also relied on its two earlier decisions in the cases of Distributors (Baroda) (P) Ltd. vs. Union of India &Ors. (1985) 47 CTR (SC) 349 : (1985) 155 ITR 201 (SC) and H.H. Sir Rama Varma

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)

b) of the IT Act, 1961 afforded an opportunity to the assessee to explain the source of cash deposit in its bank account. However, no reply was filed by the assessee. Accordingly, the case of the assessee was reopened by issuing notice under section 148 of the IT Act, 1961 dated 29.03.2022 requiring the assessee to file its return

SUPERFINE HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6,, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

80P(2)(a)(i) which was purely a legal in\nnature and even on rejection of such a claim, no penalty is leviable.\nThe case of the 'appellant RRB' is even on a better footing as all the\nfive appeals for the corresponding assessment years have been allowed\nby us on merits therefore, in terms of our four separate orders