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

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TA , JAIPUR vs. SHRI NATH CORPORATION, JAIPUR

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

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 the assessee prior to the date

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

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

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

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

disallowance of expenditure and consequently the penalty levied by the AO in respect of the said addition would also not survive. 4.2. As regards the penalty levied against income surrendered by the assessee and offered to tax in the returns of income, the AO has applied Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c). However, in the absence of making

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

disallowance of expenditure and consequently the penalty levied by the AO in respect of the said addition would also not survive. 4.2. As regards the penalty levied against income surrendered by the assessee and offered to tax in the returns of income, the AO has applied Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c). However, in the absence of making

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRAKASH CHAND SHARMA, C-42, GOKUL PATH VAISHALI NAGAR, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Ao On The Charge Of Concealment Of Income.

disallowance of expenditure and consequently the penalty levied by the AO in respect of the said addition would also not survive. 4.2. As regards the penalty levied against income surrendered by the assessee and offered to tax in the returns of income, the AO has applied Explanation 5A to section 271(1)(c). However, in the absence of making

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

section (1), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under the said clause (c).' 13. The effect of this insertion is that when an amount is added or disallowed

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

section (1), such an order of assessment or reassessment shall be deemed to constitute satisfaction of the Assessing Officer for initiation of the penalty proceedings under the said clause (c).' 13. The effect of this insertion is that when an amount is added or disallowed

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

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

disallowed, contribution to Jaipur National University which has not been held to be application of income in view of violation of section 13(1)(c

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

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

13. Both the provisions as contained in section 271AAB(1)(a) and 271AAB(1)(c) thus provides for levy of penalty in cases where search has been initiated under section 132 on or after the 1st day of July, 2012 and quantum of penalty has been kept at 10% where there is declaration in the statement recorded during the course

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