OCEAN EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LTD,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

disallowance made under section 36(1)(va) of the Act in 143(1)(a). Further, there are divergent views being

AMIT SINGH,BHIWADI (ALWAR) vs. DCIT, CPC- BENGALURU, CPC- BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act.” 16. The said

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 deduction of Rs. 1,27,04,176/- u/s 80-IBA of the act as the assesseehas failed to file the return of income within due date specified in subsection (1) of Section

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

DISALLOWANCE U/S 36(1)(va) OUTSIDE THE NO. 2 PURVIEW OF SECTION 143(1) 1. SUBMISSION 1. The proviso to Section

SANJIV PRAKASHAN,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

Section 143(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') dated 25.08.2021. The assessee has taken following grounds in this appeal; "1. The order of the learned CPC u/s 143(1) and the learned CIT(A) are bad in law and against the facts of the case. 2. The learned AO has erred in disallowing

THIKARIYA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD ,THIKARIYA vs. AO CPCITO WARD SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Disallowance of deduction claimed under sections 10AA, 80-IA, 80-1AB, 80-1B, 80-IC, 80-ID, or section 80-IE if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub- section (1

BECKHAUL DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

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

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

Section 143(1)(a)(iv) vide Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 1-04-2021 i.e. A.Y. 2021-22, hence right to increase in come u/s 143(1)(a)(iv) has been conferred only w.e.f. A.Y. 2021-22. In this regard, it is held that the AO has disallowed

TRANSINDIA NONWOVENS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act.” 16. The said

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

disallowance of the deduction under Section 80P was not justified solely because the return was filed belatedly. Referring to various judicial precedents and circulars, it was noted that the provisions of Section 80AC, as amended from time to time, and the applicability of Section 143(1

NIRMAL KUMAR BARDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

section 139(1), same could not be disallowed under section 43B or under section 36(1)(va). The Hon’ble bench

DOLCAS BOTANOSYS PVT. LTD. BIKANER,BIKANER vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGLORE/ACIT, C-1 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act.” Para

PRATAP TECHNOCRATS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU/ DCIT, CR.1 JAIPUR, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1 )(va) of the IT Act" • CIT vs.Jaipur

JAIRAJ,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1 )(va) of the IT Act" • CIT vs.Jaipur

JAIRAJ,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1 )(va) of the IT Act" • CIT vs.Jaipur

JAIRAJ,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1 )(va) of the IT Act" • CIT vs.Jaipur

THE EARTH HOUSE RESORTS LLP, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD-2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1 )(va) of the IT Act" • CIT vs.Jaipur

PRAHLAD NARAYAN BAIRWA,JAIPUR vs. ADIT,CPC,BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1 )(va) of the IT Act" • CIT vs.Jaipur

TELECRATS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

section 143(1)(a), disallowance under section 143(1)(a) was valid in view of Supreme Court's decision in case

TELECRATS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

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

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

section 143(1)(a), disallowance under section 143(1)(a) was valid in view of Supreme Court's decision in case

M/S. RAMBHOJO'S,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

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

1,60,479/- which was made on a/c of disallowance of certain expenses. The ld AO levied penalty of Rs. 57,33,335/- under clause (a) of section