INSTITUTE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE ITI JHALAWAR ,JHALAWAR vs. ITO WARD JHALAWAR, JHALAWAR

The appeals of the assessee are hereby allowed

10(23C)(iiiad), which is illegal and now it is\nthe settled legal position of law that if no addition on the reasons recorded has\nbeen made then no other addition or disallowance or denial of exemption or\nclaim or deduction can be made, for this kindly refer following decisions:\n(a) In the case of CIT vs. Shri

RAJASTHAN STATE TEXT BOOK BOARD,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE, JAIPUR

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

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

20 years. The contribution of the Government is only Rs.78292/- which is also in the year of setup long back. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Visvesvarya Technological University in Civil Appeal No. 4361-4366 & 2016 where facts and considerations were "that within a short period of a decade from the year 1999 to 2010 the appellant

DILIP SINGH YADAV,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

disallowance of exemption claimed under section 10(10AA) which was in excess Rs 300000.00. Same was replied by assessee in response column to notice as well as by e mail. The copy of said notice is enclosed as Page No’s 2-4 of paper book and the replies thereto are enclosed as page No’s 5-12 of paper

STATE BANK OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, we confirm the findings of the ld CIT(A) and the appeal of

disallow exemption in LTC Rules in case of foreign travel the same should have been specifically mentioned, but that is not so, nowhere in the entire section any such proviso/point appears. Also, it would be wrong to say that they have bent the interpretation intentionally against the intent and spirit of these provisions as: 1) The two basic conditions

BHARTIYA SHIKSHA PRACHAR SAMITI TONK,TONK vs. CIRCLE(EXEMP.), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: Learned Cit(A), Feeling Dissatisfied With The Assessment Order Dated 06.12.2018. Assessment Was Framed By The Assessing Officer. By Way Of Assessment Order, The Assessing Officer (Exemption Circle), Jaipur Computed The Total Income Of The Assessee As Under:- “7. Subject To Above, The Total Income In This Case Is Computed As Under:- Gross Receipts As Per Income & Expenditure A/C Rs. 8,20,85,351/- Less: Revenue Expenditure As Per Income & Expenditure Account Rs. 6,28,43,345/- Rs. 1,92,42,006/- Total Income Rs. 1,92,42,006/- Rs. 1,92,42,010/-“ Rounded Off

20. Herein, in view of the details of receipts of each of 44 institutions being run by the assessee “available at page 22 of the paper book”, it has been projected on behalf of the assessee that gross receipts of none of the educational institution being run by the assessee exceeded Rs. 1 Crore limit. Assessing Officer erred in observing

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

Section 10(20) as amended by Finance Act 2002. 1.22. In view of the aforesaid facts and submissions, it is very humbly prayed that the claim of the appellant for grant of exemption u/s 10(20) may kindly be accepted for all the years under consideration. 1.23. The appellant has spent for development activities in accordance with provisions

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

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

Section 10(20) as amended by Finance Act 2002. 1.22. In view of the aforesaid facts and submissions, it is very humbly prayed that the claim of the appellant for grant of exemption u/s 10(20) may kindly be accepted for all the years under consideration. 1.23. The appellant has spent for development activities in accordance with provisions

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

20,10,438/- made on account of depreciation disallowance on catalyst. iii) Curtailing disallowance out of interest paid on borrowed funds to Rs. 22,45,000/- as against that of Rs. 55,92,19,845/- made by AO since the decision of ld. CIT (A) is not in conformity with the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana

M/S. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

20,10,438/- made on account of depreciation disallowance on catalyst. iii) Curtailing disallowance out of interest paid on borrowed funds to Rs. 22,45,000/- as against that of Rs. 55,92,19,845/- made by AO since the decision of ld. CIT (A) is not in conformity with the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

20,10,438/- made on account of depreciation disallowance on catalyst. iii) Curtailing disallowance out of interest paid on borrowed funds to Rs. 22,45,000/- as against that of Rs. 55,92,19,845/- made by AO since the decision of ld. CIT (A) is not in conformity with the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana

ACIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. MAHIMA SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR

In the result, all the grounds taken by the Revenue are dismissed and ground taken by the assessee society is allowed

disallowance relating to salary, foreign travel and treating contribution to Jaipur National University as application of income. The assessee society is in appeal against the order of ld CIT(A) for not treating the allowance of depreciation as application of income. 4. The first question that arises in the present appeal is the entitlement of the assessee society to exemption

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA vs. BHIM SINGH, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Ld. Cit (A) By The Assessee Which Were Allowed By The Ld. Cit (A) Are To Be Considered In This Appeal

disallowances made by the AO in the assessment framed under section 143(3) were deleted by the ld. CIT (A) as under :- 3 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. 4 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. 5 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. 6 Shri Bhim Singh, Kota. Thus it is clear that the ld. CIT (A) has followed the decision of this Tribunal in assessee

LATE SH. BHEEM SEN BATRA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

10,20,017/- as income from undisclosed sources as against considering only the peak credit of Rs. 8,32,163/- as undisclosed income and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 5,02,344/- as against Rs. 3,14,490/- 2 ITA Nos. 184, 185/JP/2015 & ITA No. 439/JP/2016 Late Shri Bheem Sen Batra, Alwar. offered by the assessee after considering

LATE SH. BHEEM SEN BATRA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

10,20,017/- as income from undisclosed sources as against considering only the peak credit of Rs. 8,32,163/- as undisclosed income and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 5,02,344/- as against Rs. 3,14,490/- 2 ITA Nos. 184, 185/JP/2015 & ITA No. 439/JP/2016 Late Shri Bheem Sen Batra, Alwar. offered by the assessee after considering

LATE SH. BHIM SEN BATRA L/H SH. HIMANSHU BATRA,ALWAR vs. ITO, ALWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

10,20,017/- as income from undisclosed sources as against considering only the peak credit of Rs. 8,32,163/- as undisclosed income and thereby confirming the addition of Rs. 5,02,344/- as against Rs. 3,14,490/- 2 ITA Nos. 184, 185/JP/2015 & ITA No. 439/JP/2016 Late Shri Bheem Sen Batra, Alwar. offered by the assessee after considering

DCIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JOY SYNDICATE & ENCLAVE PVT. LTD. , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes

section 80IB(10) and the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB and the claim of Rs. 1,54,98,395/- made u/s 80IB of the Act is fit for disallowance and the ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee has admitted in the written submission in letter dated 27.03.2014 that the assessee’s broker had sold 20

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

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

Section 145(3) and made 20% disallowance which comes to Rs.60,70,716/- being unverifiable expenses and thus made the addition in the hands of the assessee which in first appeal the ld. CIT(A) reduced the expenses to the extent of 10

M/S SILVEX & CO.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

20% 10% During the appellate proceedings the Ld.CIT(A) upheld disallowance to the extent of 10% of expenses claimed, without fully appreciating the submissions of the assessee. In this regard the assessee humbly submits that, during the course of assessment proceedings, books of accounts and vouchers were produced before the Ld. AO for examination who has not pointed