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

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 143(2) of the Act was issued before passing the assessment order. This fact is also accepted by Ld A.O. in his remand report. 6. On the facts & circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. Lower authorities grossly erred in restricting the deduction u/s 10B of the Act to Rs 9,11,44,609/- as against claim

RAMAKANT SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 264/Jp/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Ramakant Sharma, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. S/O- Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, 1 Ward-3(5), Vimal Kunaj, Vidyut Nagar, Behind Jaipur. Bharat Petrol Pump, Jaipur. Pan No.: Bjrps 5130 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv) & Shri Satish Gupta (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/12/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 05/12/2016 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. Lower Authorities Grossly Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. A.O. Grossly Erred In Resuming Jurisdiction Without Serving Notice U/S 148 On The Appellant Assessee As Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Not Served On The Appellant.

143(2) of the Act as the return of income filed on 23.01.2015 is nothing but a non est return in eyes of law and no cognizance can be given it. 5. On the facts & circumstances of the case and in law also ld. A.O. grossly erred in finalizing the reassessment without establishing that whether the alleged property is Capital

M/S. KAIZEN ORGANICS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Hearing.

disallowance of Rs. 8,04,524/-. 3. The appellant craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing. The assessee has also raised an additional ground as under :- “ In the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the ld. AO has erred in completing assessment u/s 147 without issuing notice

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 U/S 36(1)(va) OUTSIDE THE NO. 2 PURVIEW OF SECTION 143(1) 1. SUBMISSION 1. The proviso to Section

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)

2. THE INTIMATION ISSUED UNDER SECTION 143(1) DATED 16.10.2019 IS AGAINST FIRST PROVISO TO SECTION 143(1)(A), AND THEREFORE, THE ENTIRE 143(1) PROCEEDINGS IS INVALID IN LAW. a) Brief facts of the case is that the assessee is a Private Limited Company. For the Asst.Year 2018-19, the assessee filed its return of income

PADAM CHAND DHADDA HUF,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

section 147 r.w.s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) framed vide order dated 30.09.2015. While framing the assessment, the AO made addition of Rs. 15,37,000/- on account of disallowance of transfer expenses and also made addition in respect of the disallowance of indexed cost of construction. Further, the Assessing Officer

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

disallowing the rae of profit declared by\nthe assessee. In view of the above discussion, it is held that the AO was justified in\nmaking addition u/s 2(22)(e) even when addition was already made in the original\nassessment proceedings on account of less profit rate declared by the assessee.\n4.7.5 The copy of reasons of reopening were provided

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

disallowance, provisions of section 143(1)(iv) cannot be invoked. 6. Attention is drawn towards the fact in Section 143(1)(a)(iv), words 'increase in income' has been added by Finance Act, 2021 w.e.f. 1.4.2021. In view of provisions of Sec. 2

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN EMPLOYEES CREDIT & THIRFT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the results appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2)\nwas issued on 24.08.2011. Ld. AO noted that the details in response to\nquery letter/order sheet notings have been filed which was placed on\nrecord by him. Books of account were produced during the course of\nproceedings which have been examined on test check basis with reference\nto the details filed as noted

BECKHAUL DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

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

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

disallowance made u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act in Section 143(1)(a). To this effect, the detailed written submission of the ld. AR of the assessee is reproduced as under:- GROUND NO. 1A: ADDITION MADE WITHOUT AFFORDING ANYOPPORTUNITY AS MANDATED IN PROVISO TO SECTION 143(1)(a). 1. SUBMISSION 1.1. The adjustment made while processing the return

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LTD, 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 Rs. 2,65,591/- on account of delayed payment of employees contribution towards PF and ESI. The Bench has observed that recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. vs CIT, 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC) held that the provision of Section

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LTD, 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 Rs. 2,65,591/- on account of delayed payment of employees contribution towards PF and ESI. The Bench has observed that recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. vs CIT, 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC) held that the provision of Section

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN COOPERATIVE DAIRY FEDERATION LTD, 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 Rs. 2,65,591/- on account of delayed payment of employees contribution towards PF and ESI. The Bench has observed that recently the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Court in the case of Checkmate Services (P) Ltd. vs CIT, 143 taxmann.com 178 (SC) held that the provision of Section

M/S. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION,JAIPUR vs. ADD.CIT. RANGE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

143(2) and 142(1) of the Act calling for the necessary information/documents/explanation from the assessee, the Assessing officer denied the claim of exemption U/s 11 and 12 of the Act. As per the Assessing officer, the registration granted to the assessee society has been withdrawn by the ld CIT-I Jaipur vide order dated 28.03.2013 under section 12AA

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN CRICKET ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

143(2) and 142(1) of the Act calling for the necessary information/documents/explanation from the assessee, the Assessing officer denied the claim of exemption U/s 11 and 12 of the Act. As per the Assessing officer, the registration granted to the assessee society has been withdrawn by the ld CIT-I Jaipur vide order dated 28.03.2013 under section 12AA

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), WARD-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S RAJASTHAN CRICEKT ASSOCIATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue and the ground of appeal so taken by the assessee society is thus allowed

143(2) and 142(1) of the Act calling for the necessary information/documents/explanation from the assessee, the Assessing officer denied the claim of exemption U/s 11 and 12 of the Act. As per the Assessing officer, the registration granted to the assessee society has been withdrawn by the ld CIT-I Jaipur vide order dated 28.03.2013 under section 12AA

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)

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

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hearing.”

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer on account of bad debts but appellant challenged the action of Assessing Officer for application of provision of section 115JB in appeal. In appeal no. 5 Rajasthan Financial Corporation 610/14-15 dated 30.09.2016, CIT(A) has decided this issue in favour of assessee. Against this, department prefer appeal before Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur