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)

disallowing the deduction is a matter of discussion and legal matter which cannot be rectified in order u/s 154. Thus it is debatable issue hence cannot be covered u/s 154 of I.T. Act, 1961. Section 154, scope of.-Section 154 confers jurisdiction on the Assessing Officer carry out rectification

ADITYA CEMENT,BEHROR vs. ITO, BEHROR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

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

rectification order passed u/s 154 of IT Act, 1961. The ground no. 1 and ground no. 5 are general in nature and don't require the specific adjudication. Ground no. 2 to ground no. 4 are related to disallowance

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. VINOD KUMAR JHARCHUR HUF, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground raised by the assessee in the application filed under rule 27

rectification order. The issue of disallowance has neither been discussed in order passed u/s. 143(3) nor in order u/s. 154

BHAWANI CHEM,JAIPUR vs. ASSESING OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

rectification purpose, issues cannot be examined which are not apparent from the record. The appeal against order u/s. 154 has been filed to agitate the grievances against the order u/s. 143(1) of the Act. It is explicitly clear that the grounds of appeal filed by the appellant company are not eminating from the order u/s. 154

RENU KHUNTETA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD3(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

disallowance of Rs. 410898/- made u/s 143(3) whereas the adjusted total income as per Sec. 115JC (2) should be Rs. 1837984/-(Rs. 0 plus deduction claimed under chapter VI A u/s 80IA of Rs. 1837984) as per the return income. The disallowance/addition made in the order u/s 143(3) Rs. 383014/- will not be considered in the calculation

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

rectification proceedings u/s 154\nhowever, same was dropped instead the Assessing Officer (“AO”) made proposal for\nrevising the assessment u/s 263 of the Act made to the Ld. Pr.CIT - Whether objections\nof the assessee were not duly considered by the Ld. Pr. CIT before passing the\nimpugned order? - HELD THAT:- From the order

MAYUR GLOBAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(3), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed Rs.5,44,649 /- u/s 14A of the I.T. Act. The assessee filed application u/s 154 before the Assessing Officer, requesting for rectification

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

rectification u/s 154 of the Act (though\nnot conceding) instead of invoking Section 263. In this regard kindly refer\nto the case of CIT vs. Amitabh Bachchan [2016] 286 CTR (SC) 113,\nwherein it is held that:\n“9. Under the Act different shades of power have been conferred on\ndifferent authorities to deal with orders of assessment passed

MOHAMMED SIRAJ,JHUNJHUNU vs. ITO, WARD-1, JHUNJHUNU, JHUNJHUNU

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

rectification order passed u/s. 154 of the IT Act Brief facts of the case as evident from order u/s. 154 dated 19.08.2021 is that during the relevant previous year the appellant sold 6 plots for total sale consideration of Rs.17.20,000/- and after claiming indexed cost of acquisition of Rs.62,800 indexed cost of construction of Rs.3

THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURC CO. OPERATIVE CREDIT AND THRIFT SOCIETY LTD.,AJMER vs. ITO,WD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Rectification application u/s 154 dated 18.04.2020\n23\n5.\nCopy of Written Submission filed on dated 9.10.2022 in\nresponse to Notice u/s 250 datec 08.09.2022\n24-25\n6.\nCopy of Written Submission filed on dated 20.04.2023 in\nresponse to Notice u/s 250 dated 06.04 20'23\n26-27\n7.\nThe Id. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has correctly

DHABRIYA POLYWOOD LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Act order u/s 154 of the Income Tax are not debatable. Further, the ld. Act, 1961on debatable issues which CIT(A) while passing the order are outside the purview of section u/s 250 of the Act clearly stated in 154. The Action of the ld. CIT(A) is para 4.3 of the order

MEHAR CHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Itat & The Delay Occurred May Kindly Be Condoned.

rectification application before CPC u/s 154 on 08.05.2019 which means that the date of order u/s 143(1) is before 08.05.2019. In that case, this appeal which was filed on 22.06.2019 becomes belated appeal. However, in Form 35, assessee has mentioned that appeal is filed in time which is factually incorrect. Since the appeal is belated and no reason

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)

rectification request made under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before CPC against changes made by CPC and disallowing claim u/s

ABHIMANYU SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITA, WARD 2(2), KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

rectification order passed by the AO u/s 154, however, proceeded ahead and has confirmed the disallowance made U/s 143(1) on account

JAIPUR RUGS COMPANY PVT LTD.,MANSAROVAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Return Of Income For The Assessment Year.

disallowance of Rs.38,74,377/- ignoring that- (i) As per ITR form 6 there is no option to put the amount of payment under section 43B on or before filing of ITR u/s 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (ii) Appellant was under the process of filing of application u/s 154 for rectification

RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowed by AO.\nAgainst this appellant filed rectification application with AO. The\nrectification application rejected by the AO vide its order dated\n15.12.2020 as under-\n\"The explain discrepancies found on the documents furnished during\nthe course of assessment proceedings. Now assessee has filed\napplication us/ 154 with the explanation that the excess expenditure\nwas met out from accumulated funds

MANISH KUMAR VIJAY,KOTA vs. ITO, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

u/s 154 and the grounds of appeal raised. The appellant has not submitted any documentary evidence in support of his claim that at the time of filling of return of income some entry which was not related to him reflected in his 26 AS due to wrong PAN enter in TDS return filed by UIT Kota, which was rectified

DCIT, C-2, AJMER vs. ANANT AUTO, BEAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

disallowing so called excess remuneration paid to working partners u/s 40(b). ” 11. The ld. CIT(A) has given his observation and decision on para 4 which is abstracted as under:- “4.0 Observations, Findings and Decisions 4.1 I have perused the rectification order passed u/s 154