ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. JITENDRA KUMAR AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

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

13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the decisions relied upon bylearned senior advocate for the appellant, we are of the considered opinion that the view taken by the Tribunalis erroneous. The CIT (A) rightly held that it is not relevant whether any return of income was filed by theassessee prior to the date

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, JAIPUR vs. ROYAL JEWELLERS, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

13. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also\nconsidering the decisions relied upon bylearned senior advocate for the appellant,\nwe are of the considered opinion that the view taken by the Tribunalis erroneous.\nThe CIT (A) rightly held that it is not relevant whether any return of income was\nfiled by the assessee prior to the date

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)

1)(c) by holding that the amount of Rs.2,13,17,575/- added or disallowed by the AO which has reached finality in computing the total income of the assessee shall, for the purpose of clause (c) of this sub-section

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

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

1)(c) by holding that the\namount of Rs.2,13,17,575/- added or disallowed by the AO which has reached\nfinality in computing the total income of the assessee shall, for the purpose of\nclause (c) of this sub-section

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Section\n271(1)(c) of the Act and we find that it also does not suffer from any\nlegal infirmity. Matter is also concluded by the findings of the fact.\nFor all the reasons aforestated, we find that no substantial questions of\nlaw are involved in the present appeals. Consequently, all the appeals\nare dismissed.\n(12) PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER

JAIPUR ENGINEERING COLLEGE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

disallowance confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) Submission:- 1. At the outset it is submitted that as explained supra in Ground No.1, even if section 13(1)(c

RAWAT BAL VIDHA NIKETAN SAMITTEE,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

section 13(1)(c) and\n13(1)(d)\"\n12. It is noted that the assessing officer has failed to take note\nof the fact that there were disallowances

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,EXEMPTIONS,CIRCLE,JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

section 13(1) (c)". 3 ACIT vs. Global Institute of Technology i. "Whether Id. CIT(A) justified in holding entire reassessment is considered void and illegal without considering the merits of the addition of disallowances

GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. DCIT-CIRCLE-EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

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

Disallowance of interest in relation Interest free advances to trustees. 9 GLOBAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SOCIETY, JAIPUR VS DCIT-CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR Addition of Rs. 60,60,000/- was made by the AO on account of violation of section 13(1)(c

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

disallowed to the assessee. ‘’2.2 Submission of Appellant:- The provision of Section 13(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is reproduced as under:- (d) in the case of a trust for charitable or religious purposes or a charitable or religious institution, any income thereof, if for any period during the previous year— (i) any funds of the trust

KANHAIYALAL RAMESHWAR DAS,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

section\n271(1)(c) of the Act.\n8.\nWe have heard both the parties and perused the materials available\non record. Vide Ground no 1 & 2 the assessee challenges the levy of\npenalty of Rs.4,04,481/-. The brief facts related to the levy of this penalty is\nthat the assessee there was an action of search and seizure action

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR vs. M/S APOLLO ANIMAL MEDICAL GROUP TRUST, JAIPUR

In the result, the grounds of appeal taken by the Revenue are dismissed

disallowed. In In view of the above mentioned discussion provisions of sec. 13(1)(c)(ii) row. 13(2)(g) of the Act are attracted and the assessee’s exemption u/s 11 is rejected and moreover a sum of Rs. 7,20,000/- as discussed above is added to the total income of the assessee trust. (Addition

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)

13] Held precisely : The power under sub-section (1) of Section 143 of the Act is summary in nature designed to cause adjustments which are apparent from the return while that under sub-sections(2) and (3) is to scrutinize the return and cause deeper probe to arrive at the correct determination of the liability of the assessee. c

RUPESH TAMBI,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is Partly allowed

13 of the Indian Income tax Act, 1922] Method of accounting System of\naccounting Assessment year 1946-47 Whether where there is an unexplained\ncash credit it is open to ITO to hold that it is income of assessee and no further\nburden lies on ITO to show that income is from any particular source - Held

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)

13,158. Such disallowances made by the ld. AO(CPC) were mistake apparent on record. Resultantly, assessee company filed 3 VAIBHAV GLOBAL LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR rectification u/s 154 on 8.05.2019, against such adjustments.The AO (CPC) passed rectification order on 10.05.2019, without any rectification in Income Tax Computation. 2.2 Against the rectification order, passed

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)

C.— 14 Aravali Buildhome LLP Deductions in respect of certain incomes” (which includes deduction under section 80P of the Act), can be made if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub-section (1) of section 139. This amendment has been introduced w.e.f. 1-4-2021. Accordingly, the above amendment would not apply to the impugned assessment

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

C-Deductions in respect of certain incomes.\"\r\nno such deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of this\r\nincome for such assessment year on or before the due date specified under\r\nsub-section (1) of Section 139.]\"\r\nOn a perusal of the aforesaid statutory provision, it transpires that sub-section

VISION JEWELLERS,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallow said payments under section 40A(3), assessee offered that its income might be computed by applying net profit rate of 8 per cent of gross receipts - Assessing Officer having accepted 8 VISION JEWELLERS VS DCIT CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR assessee's offer, made addition in terms of section 44AD - He also passed a penalty order under section 271(1)(c