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)

153B(1)(b) for the AY 2019-20, is erroneous in so far in terms of not invoking the provisions of section 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961 r.w.r. 8D of the I.T. Act, 1962 and thereby not disallowing

PRINCESS INFRA & DEVELOPMENT LLP,KOTA vs. ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicate hereinabove

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

disallowance Aggrieved by the aforesaid addition the appellant has preferred the present appeal. 5. Ground No. 1 of appeal relates to passing ex-parte assessment order under section 144 read with section 153B

PRINCESS INFRA & DEVELOPMENT LLP,KOTA vs. ACIT-CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA , KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicate hereinabove

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

disallowance Aggrieved by the aforesaid addition the appellant has preferred the present appeal. 5. Ground No. 1 of appeal relates to passing ex-parte assessment order under section 144 read with section 153B

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LTD ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) JAIPUR , JAIPUR

disallowance of Rs. 9,41,075/- u/s. 40A(3) of the Act.\n9. On culmination of the assessment proceedings, the Id. PCIT called\nfor the assessment records for examination as per provision of section 263\nof the Act. Ld. PCIT upon examination noted that as per concluding remark\nin para 5 of assessment order on page 163 to184, the assessee

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL JAIPUR , JAIPUR

disallowance of Rs. 9,41,075/- u/s. 40A(3) of the Act.\n9. On culmination of the assessment proceedings, the Id. PCIT called for the assessment records for examination as per provision of section 263 of the Act. Ld. PCIT upon examination noted that as per concluding remark in para 5 of assessment order on page 163 to184, the assessee

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

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

section 153C thereafter is also barred by limitation and thus, being a nullity, deserves to be quashed. 2. The Id. CITA erred in not deciding that the impugned assessment order passed us 144 r.w.s. 153C of the Act dated 30.03.2023 for A.Y. 2014 15 is barred by limitation us 153B r.w.s 153C of the Act. Considering that the date

SHRI SATISH CHANDRA KATTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

disallowing a sum of Rs. 12,16,500 (interest of Rs. 9,81,495 and\ncommission of Rs. 2,31,005) under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action\nof the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may\nplease be granted by quashing the said disallowance

SIYARAM EXPORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

disallowing a sum of Rs. 12,16,500 (interest of Rs. 9,81,495 and\ncommission of Rs. 2,31,005) under section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The action\nof the ld. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may\nplease be granted by quashing the said disallowance

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the AO is found to be justified and confirmed. This ground of appeal is treated as dismissed.’’ Ground No. 7 of the assessee:- Ld. CIT(A)’s findings in respect of grounds of appeal of the assessee. ‘’10.3 I have considered the facts of the case and written submissions of the appellant as against the observations/findings

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-KOTA, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

disallowance made by the AO is found to be justified and confirmed. This ground of appeal is treated as dismissed.’’ Ground No. 7 of the assessee:- Ld. CIT(A)’s findings in respect of grounds of appeal of the assessee. ‘’10.3 I have considered the facts of the case and written submissions of the appellant as against the observations/findings

TEJENDER PAL SINGH SAHNI,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result ITA No. 1147/JP/2024 (A

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

disallowance of deduction u/s. 80C of the Act amounting to Rs. 51,960/-. The assessee being aggrieved with the same preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A)-2, Udaipur, who in turn confirmed the order of the AO vide order dated: 28.06.2019. The assessee being further aggrieved with this order of the Ld. CIT (A)-2, Udaipur preferred

RAVI HALDIA,C/O HALDIA MULTIPOINT HOUSE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly

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

section 260A (Set-Aside) r.w.s 153A of the Income Tax Act, by DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur. Ravi Haldia vs. DCIT 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure disputed in each year, therefore, these appeals were heard together with the agreement of both the parties

RAVI HALDIA,HALDIA MULTIPOINT HOUSE vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are partly

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

section 260A (Set-Aside) r.w.s 153A of the Income Tax Act, by DCIT, Circle-01, Jaipur. Ravi Haldia vs. DCIT 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals are almost identical on facts and are almost common, except the difference in figure disputed in each year, therefore, these appeals were heard together with the agreement of both the parties

RESONANCE EDUVENTURES LIMITED,,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, , KOTA

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2015-16 to 2018-19 respectively. The grounds raised by the assesseein all these appeals are common except with variance in figures, therefore, for the sake of convenience. Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. 2. In ITA No. 672/JPR/2024, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- ITA NO. 672/JP/2024

RESONANCE EDUVENTURES LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2015-16 to 2018-19 respectively. The grounds raised by the assesseein all these appeals are common except with variance in figures, therefore, for the sake of convenience. Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. 2. In ITA No. 672/JPR/2024, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- ITA NO. 672/JP/2024

RESONANCE EDUVENTURES LIMITED,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,, KOTA

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2015-16 to 2018-19 respectively. The grounds raised by the assesseein all these appeals are common except with variance in figures, therefore, for the sake of convenience. Resonance Eduventures Ltd., Kota. 2. In ITA No. 672/JPR/2024, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- ITA NO. 672/JP/2024

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.931 to 936/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2018-19 Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya 005, (Nayagaun) Ram Ganmandi, Kota बनाम DCIT, Vill. Beedmandi Vs. Central Circle, Kota स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: APAPS 6392 E अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by : Sh. P. C. Parwal, CA राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Mrs. Alka Gautam,

153B(1)(b) of the Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] by ACIT, Central Circle, Kota [ for short AO ]. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals in ITA Nos. 931 to 934/JP/2024 for A.Ys 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2016-17 are inter related, identical on facts and are almost common, except

SH. DHEERAJ SINGH SISODIYA,KOTA vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the ground no

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

153B(1)(b) of the Sh. Dheeraj Singh Sisodiya vs. DCIT Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] by ACIT, Central Circle, Kota [ for short AO ]. 2. Since the issues involved in these appeals in ITA Nos. 931 to 934/JP/2024 for A.Ys 2012-13 & 2014-15 to 2016-17 are inter related, identical on facts and are almost common, except