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)

section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 and thereby setting aside the assessment order on this issue to be redone afresh without appreciating that the appellant had not earned any exempt income 2 Girnar Software Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. during the year under consideration to attract any disallowance

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)

section 14A by inserting a non-obstante clause and Explanation will takeeffectfrom1-4-2022 and cannot be presumed to have retrospective effects. 2.11 Entire investments shall not be considered to make disallowances. Ld PCIT computed total disallowance which required to be made u/s 14A at Rs. 2

RASHLEELA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

14A of the Act should be restricted to Rs.5,56,500/-\nonly. Accordingly, the ground Nos.1 & 2 raised by the assessee are\npartly allowed and Grounds No.1 & 2 raised by the Revenue are partly\nallowed.\"\nOn the basis of above, it is clear that the disallowance of expenditure\non account of 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)

disallowance of Rs.71,75,575/- u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D(2). The same was sustained by CIT(A) and ITAT holding that section

TRUWORTH INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 14A. In other 5 TRUWORTH INFOTECH PVT LTD. VS ITO , WARD 2(2), JAIPUR words, if investments in securities in made out of common funds and the assessee has available, own non-interest bearing funds larger than the investments made in tax-free securities, then in such cases, disallowance

BIMAL ROY SONI,J L N MARG vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1, JAIPUR, STATUE CIRCLE

In the result, appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 239 & 240/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bimal Roy Soni 11, Chetak Marg, JLN Marg Jaipur cuke Vs. DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur NCR, Building LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFPPS 1588 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a lquokb

Section 14A(2) of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance

BIMAL ROY SONI,J L N MARG vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, N.C.R. BUILDING

In the result, appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 239 & 240/JP/2022 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bimal Roy Soni 11, Chetak Marg, JLN Marg Jaipur cuke Vs. DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur NCR, Building LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AFPPS 1588 H vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Jain (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Runi Pal (Addl. CIT) a lquokb

Section 14A(2) of the Act, read with Rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of apportionment, the AO needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo moto disallowance

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

disallowance of\nRs.71,75,575/- u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D(2). The same was sustained by CIT(A) and\nITAT holding that section

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PVT LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the years [A

14A\nand instead the disallowance of interest to be made u/s 36(1)(iii). Thereby\nconsequently the revenue is objecting to the finding of ld. CIT(A) of not\nconsidering the aforesaid disallowance for adjustment in view of\nexplanation 1(f) of section 115JB(2

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. GVK JAIPUR EXPRESSWAY PVT LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue for the years [A

14A\nand instead the disallowance of interest to be made u/s 36(1)(iii). Thereby\nconsequently the revenue is objecting to the finding of ld. CIT(A) of not\nconsidering the aforesaid disallowance for adjustment in view of\nexplanation 1(f) of section 115JB(2

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. NARESH KUMAR GUPTA, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the results the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed and the

Bench: Him The Order Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, [ For Short “Act” ] By The Acit, Circle, Sri Ganganagar [

section 14A, made disallowance of Rs.Rs.2,87,229/-. The appellant has stated that the disallowance u/s 14A is attracted

M/S ETERNAL HEART CARE CENTRE & RESEARCH INSTITUTE PVT. LTD. ,3A, JAGATPURA ROAD, NEAR JAWAHAR CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

Section 263 of the Act wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. ‘’1. The ld. PCIT has erred on facts and in law in holding that the assessment order passed u/s 143(2) dated 24- 02-2021 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue as no disallowance u/s 14A

MAHADEV ENCLAVE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 14A of IT Act, 1961 r.w.r. 8D of IT Rules, 1962 but the AO neither made any query in this regard nor otherwise issue was examined. The interest cost directly attributable to the investment in agriculture land in terms of Rule 8D(2)(i) works out to Rs.7,94,683/- and disallowance

SH. NAWAL KISHORE DANGAYACH,A-34-A, RAM NAGAR, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

disallowance under section 14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible, SLP filed against said decision was dismissed. CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxman 2

M/S SHRIRAM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.,E-8, EPIP RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SITAPURA, JAIPUR vs. PCIT, JAIPUR-2, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r8D(2) of the Act has not been considered by AO ignoring that this issue has been raised by the AO in notice u/s 142(1) dt. 23.11.2020 and replied by the assessee vide letter dt. 07.12.2020 and thus the order so passed is illegal & bad in law. 2 Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd., Jaipur. 2

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. M/S MANGLAM BUILD DEVELOPERS LTD, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

2 In all these casesHon’ble Supreme Court dismissed the SLP filed by the department against High Court ruling that section 14A cannot be invoked where no exempt income was earned by assessee in relevant assessment year. (ii) Explanation to section 14A inserted by Finance Act, 2022 which provides that section 14A will apply in a case where the income

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

2(24)(x) of the Act.\n(iv)& (v) Id. PCIT noted that the assessee disclosed investment in stock and\ntherefore, considering the provisions of section 69 of the Act. The said income is\nrequired to be taxed as per the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act.\n5\nITA No. 598/JP/2024\nPinkcity Jewelhouse Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT\n4.1

APM INDUSTRIES LTD,BHIWADI, ALWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE - 1, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 203/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2018-19 APM Industries Ltd. SP-147, Industrial Area Bhiwadi, Alwar cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-01, Alwar LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AACCA 5114 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. S. L. Poddar jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) a l

2,64,488/- for earning this exempt income and have disallowed the same u/s. 14A of the Act in the computation of income. However, no details have been furnished as to how this amount was computed. In absence of computation of this expenditure the correct amount of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act was required to be calculated