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

disallowance was to be made in terms of section 14A. 17.1. In the earlier assessment years the Tribunal had remanded the matter to the file of the CIT(A) in order to determine the applicability of Section 36(1)(iii) as observed by the AO since the finding had been given by the CIT(A) with reference to section 14

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance was to be made in terms of section 14A. 17.1. In the earlier assessment years the Tribunal had remanded the matter to the file of the CIT(A) in order to determine the applicability of Section 36(1)(iii) as observed by the AO since the finding had been given by the CIT(A) with reference to section 14

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

section 43B could not have been applied to the case of the\nassessee.\"\n1.4.4 CIT v. ATS Real Estate Builders (P.) Ltd. [2025] 172 taxmann.com 611\n(Delhi - Trib.) (DC 14-16) held that,\n“6. The ground no. 2 to 4 of appeal are in respect of single issue i.e. disallowance

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

section 43B could not have been applied to the case of the\nassessee."\n1.4.4 CIT v. ATS Real Estate Builders (P.) Ltd. [2025] 172 taxmann.com 611\n(Delhi - Trib.) (DC 14-16) held that,\n“6. The ground no. 2 to 4 of appeal are in respect of single issue i.e. disallowance

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

section 43B could not have been applied to the case of the\nassessee."\n1.4.4 CIT v. ATS Real Estate Builders (P.) Ltd. [2025] 172 taxmann.com 611\n(Delhi - Trib.) (DC 14-16) held that,\n“6. The ground no. 2 to 4 of appeal are in respect of single issue i.e. disallowance

ASSOCIATED SOAPSTONE DISTRIBUTING CO PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

disallowance\nunder section 14-A of any amount was not permissible - High Court\nupheld order passed by Tribunal Whether, on facts

GIRNAR SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,6TH FLOOR, JAIPUR TEXTILE MARKET, B-2, NEAR MODEL TOWN, MALVIYA NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. PCIT – 2, JAIPUR, NEW CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by Assessing Officer under Rule 8D read with Section 14A. Further, amendment made by Finance Act 2022 is prospective in nature. • PCIT vs. MMTC Ltd. (2022) 6 NYPCTR 1372 (Del HC): Relevant extracts of the decision are as under: 14

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S. JAGDAMBE STONE COMPANY, BHARATPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) read with section 194C of the Act. IN this regard, he placed reliance on the judgement of ITAT Kolkata in the case of Soma Rani Ghosh Vs DCIT Kolkata, ITA No. 1420/KOL/2015. Once the conditions of Section 194C(6) is satisfied, the liability to deduct the TDS would cease and accordingly, application of section

CAREER POINT LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

disallowance could be made under section 14 A with respect to expenditure incurred by assessee to earn exempt income, when

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

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

14-6-2021(Para – 18 26) Further it is submitted that for bringing clarity on the issue the Finance Bill, 2021 proposed to add an Explanation – 2 to section 36 (1) (va) and Explanation – 5 to section 43B specifically to disallow

RMC GEMS INDIA LTD,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

14-6-2021(Para – 18 26) Further it is submitted that for bringing clarity on the issue the Finance Bill, 2021 proposed to add an Explanation – 2 to section 36 (1) (va) and Explanation – 5 to section 43B specifically to disallow

GOSIL EXPORTS PVT LTD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE -I, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Due Date Of Filing Return.’’

disallowance for late deposit of contribution to PF and ESI debatable in nature hence adjustments u/s 143(1)(a) can not be made. The latest judgment in case S.V. Engineering Constructions India (P) Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Visakhapatnam) 1.T.A.No.130/Viz/2021 on same facts with referring decision in the case of Andhra Trade Development Corporation in LT.A No.434/Viz/2019 dated 05.05.2021 taken

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

disallowance could be made in view of the provisions of Section 43B as amended by the Finance Act, 2003.” 14

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

disallowed under Section 43B or under Section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act.” Para 24: “Accordingly, the substantial question of law is answered against the appellant-revenue and in favour of the assessee.” c. CIT Vs. Udaipur Dugdh Utpadak Sahakari Sangh Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 163 Relying on various decisions of Hon’ble Supreme Court as also the decision

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)

14 it appears that you have concealed the particulars of your income or furnished inaccurate particulars of such income. You are hereby requested to appear before me on 15-01-2016 at 11AM and show cause why an order imposing a penalty on you should not be made under section 271(1)© of the Income

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

14-27\nhave given due consideration to the\nfact that the issue was highly\nde\n\nbatable and controversial. As already\ndiscussed earlier, adjustments u/s\n143(1) of Income Tax Act by way of\nintimation u/s 143(1) of Income Tax Act,\non debatable and controversial issues,\nis beyond the scope of section 143(1) of\nIncome Tax Act. Revenue

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 either in writing or in electronic mode, thus CPC center had erred in issuing intimation u/s 143(1) as it had not followed first proviso to Section 143(10(a) – Held, Yes – Whether therefore entire section 143(1) proceedings being invalid in law, intimation issued by CPC was to be quashed and set aside – Held yes (Paras

SHIIV VEG PRO PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTER, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance under section 36(1)(va) of the Act. It is an undisputed fact that there has been slight delay in the deposit of employees’ contribution of PF and ESI by the assessee and the contribution have been deposited beyond the due date prescribed by the relevant 14