NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE -2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

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

disallowed the assessee's claim of deduction u/s.80G. Against this disallowance of deduction u/s.80G by the learned CIT assessee preferred

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

Deduction u/s.80P, as claimed,\r\ncannot be allowed.\r\nIn view of the above, in consequence of Disallowance of Deduction

DCIT,C-7, JAIPUR vs. BHARAT MOHAN RATURI, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed and that of the C

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 413/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2013-14 The DCIT Circle-7 Jaipur cuke Vs. Shri Bharat Mohan Raturi 161, Indira Colony, Bani Park Jaipur 302 015 (Raj) LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANPR 7066G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent CO No. 2/JP/2023 (Arising out of vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 413/JP/2022 ) fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2013-14 Shri Bharat Mohan Raturi 161, Indira

disallowed deduction u/s 54F without mentioning anything about the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 54. Now before ITAT

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

disallowed the entire claim of deduction u/s. 10AA of the Act and has disallowed the claim of deduction by dividing

DCIT, C-4, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JLC ELECTROMET PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

deduct TDS u/s 195 and whether the disallowance was liable to be made u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act, for non deduction

M/S P. R. ROLLING MILLS P. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Itat By Taking Following

disallowed the weighted deduction claimed u/s 35(1)(ii) on the donation of Rs.1,00,00,000/-, which disallowance has been

NASH FASHION (INDIA) LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in ITA no

disallowed the assessee's claim\nof deduction u/s.80G. Against this disallowance of deduction u/s.80G by the\nlearned CIT assessee preferred

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GURU PRAGYA INFRA (P) LTD., JAIPUR

deduction u/s 80-IB(10) is to be disallowed or only the proportionate disallowance is to be made in case

NASH FASHIONS (INDIA) LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground is allowed for statistical purposes

disallowed the assessee's claim of deduction u/s.80G. Against this disallowance of deduction u/s.80G by the learned CIT assessee preferred

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)

disallows certain deductions). As a result, the CPC disallowed the 6 Dynamic Powertech Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT assessee company's claim

ARAVALI BUILDHOMES LLP,JAIPUR vs. AO CPC, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance of a claim or deduction in a particular section and should not be disallowed u/s 143(1), the deduction

M/S SHIV KUMAR SUSHIL KUMAR TEA ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

deduction under section 80-IC. AO disallowed the deduction on the ground that assessee did not file its return within

BANSAL CLASSES PVIVATE LTD.,KOTA vs. JCIT, KOTA

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

disallowance of deduction claimed by assessee u/s 80G.” 3. In its first ground of appeal, the assessee has challenged the action

RAVI KUMAR RAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed and impugned orders are set aside

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) which was partly considered by Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 14-12-2018 in Appeal No. 474/2015-16. Vide that order Ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition from Rs.6,01,459/- to Rs.2,67,647/- by applying G.P. Rate @ 12%. Hence, the addition of Rs.2,67,647/- was sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, Ld. AO passed penalty order dated 01-05-2020 wherein the AO imposed the penalty on the assessee for an amount of Rs.1,03,150/- u/s Section 271(1)(c) of the Act by observing as under:-

disallowance of any amount as deductions claimed. The word ‘‘amount’’ of which additions made or deductions disallowed also denotes reference

RAVI KUMAR RAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

Appeals are allowed and impugned orders are set aside

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

disallowance of any amount as deductions claimed. The word ‘‘amount’’ of which additions made or deductions disallowed also denotes reference

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

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

deduction u/s 80-IA and disallowance u/s 14A. Thereafter on the last page of the assessment order, it is mentioned

KISHAN GOPAL RUNGTA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Order Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 12.01.2020 Ignoring That Audit Report In Form No. 10Ccb Was Filed On 22.04.2019. 2. The Appellant Craves To Alter, Amend & Modify Any Ground Of Appeal. 3. Necessary Cost Be Awarded To The Assessee.”

disallowance of deduction u/s 80- IA of Rs. 44,25,650/-. 6. The primary condition to get that deduction the appellant

RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, JPR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

deduction u/s 80JJAA. Ld. CIT(A) also sustained the disallowance of deduction for want of form along with ITR before