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)

disallowance before initiation of the reassessment proceedings for this assessment year. Thus, the appellant asserts that the matter was covered in the appeal, precluding the AO from exercising jurisdiction under section 147 read with 148 of the Act. In this circumstance, the AO should have followed the decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal. In this context, it is important

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

3) of section 143 or this section has\nbeen made for the relevant assessment year, no action shall be taken under this section\nafter the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment year, unless any\nincome chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for such assessment year by reason of\nthe failure on the part

SHRI GOVIND NARAIN JOHARI,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Although The Second Round Of Assessment Was Completed At The Directions Of Hon’Ble Itat.

disallowance of Rs. 16,02,991/- on account of interest paid for funds used in the WIP construction without any valid ground and hence needs to be deleted. 9. The assessee carves the right to add, delete, amend or abandon any ground of appeal before or during the course of hearing. The ld. A/R of the assessee has submitted that

M/S. RAJDHANI CRAFTS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4 JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

3) of the Act was completed on 01/03/2013 and thereafter the A.O. issued notice U/s 148 of the Act on 01/11/2013 to reassess the income of the assessee by disallowing the claim of exemption U/s 10B of the Act. He has further submitted that the assessee filed return of income in response to notice issued

SAROJ DEVI HALDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-6(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

disallowed The assessee also accepted Rs.\n75,00,000 as an advance in relation of transfer of capital asset. The assessee\nfailed to give a satisfactory reply and provide any required details. Hence, the\nA.O. completed the assessment and passed order u/s 147/1448 of the Income-\ntax Act dated 13.12.2019 Assessing total Income

AMIT COLONIZERS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

142(1) along with query was issued to the assessee on 08.12.2014 asking it to furnish certain information/details. In response AR of the assessee, appeared from time to time and filed requisite details / information, produced books of accounts which were test checked and the facts of the case were discussed by the ld. AO. The assessee engaged in business

CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

142(1) dated 08.11.2019\n51-56\n13.\nCopy of reply submitted on 15.11.2019 in response to notice issued u/s\n142(1) of the Act.\n57-63\n14.\nCopy of assessment order dated 29.11.2019 for AY 2017-18\n64-76\n15.\nCopy of appeal memo against the order dated 29.11.2019\n77-79\n16.\nCopy of notice issued u/s 12AA(3

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. M/S SHIV VEGPRO PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance of commission payment and freight payment total amounting to Rs. 12,83,51,717/-. The assessee challenged the action of the AO before the ld. CIT (A) both on merits of the addition as well as validity of reopening of the assessment. The ld. CIT (A) deleted the addition made by the AO. However, the ground raised

CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA GADEPAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, SAVINA-UDAIPUR

142(1) of the\nI.T. Act 1961 were issued and duly served to the assessee. Ld. AO\nin the assessment order noted that the assessee submitted replies\nwhich were examined and kept on record.\nAfter examination of the replies submitted by the assessee,\nId. AO concluded that explanation offered by the assessee was\nsatisfactory and no adverse inference was drawn

MURLI DHAR UPADHYAY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(3), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, stands allowed

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

3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the absence of such rejection, the AO cannot make an ad-hoc disallowance of expenses merely on estimate or suspicion. In the absence of rejection of books, the accounts are deemed to be acceptable, and no lump-sum disallowance can be made arbitrarily. Further it is pertinent to mention that there

AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

disallowance shall be made and no payment shall be deemed to be the profits and gains of business or profession under sub-section (3) and this sub-section where a payment or aggregate of payments made to a person in a day, otherwise than by an account payee cheque drawn on a bank or account payee bank draft, exceeds twenty

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BEAWAR vs. SHRI MAN MOHAN MITTAL, BEAWAR

In the result, the cross objection so raised by the assessee is rejected

sections 246 to 251 of the Act makes it clear that any questions arising out of the assessment orders in an appeal by the assessee can be possible and wide powers are given to the appellate authority, but these powers are circumscribed by the assessment order in the matters arising thereof or a matter arising out of the proceedings. Even

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 under section 14A of the Act. 3. Necessary cost be awarded to the assessee. Ground No. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are inter-connected and inter- related against the order passed under section 263 of the IT Act, 1961 and thereby directing the AO to make addition of Rs. 66,30,268/- under 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)

3) read with Section 143(3A) and 143(3B) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” The ld. A/R now raised the main issue in this case is whether the ld. Pr. CIT was justified in invoking jurisdiction under section 263 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and thereby proposing to make disallowance of Rs. 2,53,26,820/- under section

SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeals for the assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and for the assessment year 2012-13 is allowed

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

disallowed by the AO due to non compliance being the payment made in cash and genuineness of the expenses. Apparently for the assessment year 2012-13 the AO while completing the assessment U/s 143(3) of the Act has taken a decision on this issue and therefore, subsequent reopening of the assessment was based on change of opinion

SHRI JITENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,BHARATPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, BHARATPUR

In the result, the appeals for the assessment year 2011-12 is dismissed and for the assessment year 2012-13 is allowed

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing.”

disallowed by the AO due to non compliance being the payment made in cash and genuineness of the expenses. Apparently for the assessment year 2012-13 the AO while completing the assessment U/s 143(3) of the Act has taken a decision on this issue and therefore, subsequent reopening of the assessment was based on change of opinion

PRAKASH CHAND VARINDANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CERTAL CIRLCE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

142(1) of the IT Act. 1961 within due date under\nsection 139(1). During the survey proceedings, it was noticed that the\nassessee has not maintained regular books of accounts. However, the\nassessee was claiming various expenses. On being asked, he replied in his\nstatement that he did not have details of expenses. However, he had\nincurred various expenses

YOGESH GINNING MILL, PROP. YOGESH CHAND GUPTA,GOVINDGARH vs. ACIT, CIRCLE I, ALWAR

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

Bench: This Tribunal Which Were Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- 4, Jaipur [ For Short Cit(A) ] Passed On Dates & F For The Assessment Years Mentioned As Tabulated Here In Below, In Turn Those Orders Were Arises Because The Assessee Has Yogesh Ginning Mill Vs. Acit

disallowances are arbitrary and cannot be upheld. R. Reliance can be placed on the case of M/S. Samwon Precision Mould Mfg India Pvt Ltd vs Ito, 2016(4) TMI 1094 –ITAT Delhi, It was held that the Assessing Officer rejected the books of account of the assesse Under Section 145 of the Act on the ground that the appellant

YOGESH GINNING MILL, PROP. YOGESH CHAND GUPTA,GOVINDGARH vs. ACIT, ALWAR

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

Bench: This Tribunal Which Were Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal)- 4, Jaipur [ For Short Cit(A) ] Passed On Dates & F For The Assessment Years Mentioned As Tabulated Here In Below, In Turn Those Orders Were Arises Because The Assessee Has Yogesh Ginning Mill Vs. Acit

disallowances are arbitrary and cannot be upheld. R. Reliance can be placed on the case of M/S. Samwon Precision Mould Mfg India Pvt Ltd vs Ito, 2016(4) TMI 1094 –ITAT Delhi, It was held that the Assessing Officer rejected the books of account of the assesse Under Section 145 of the Act on the ground that the appellant