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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. • CIT v. Hero Cycles Limited (323 ITR 518)(P&H) • CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd (319 ITR 204

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

204\n(Ahmedabad -\n1-4\nSection 36(1) (va), read with section\n143(1), of the Income-tax Act, 1961\nEmployee's contribution (Intimation for\nmaking adjustment) Assessment year\n2018-19 Whether where addition was\nmade to income of assessee, being late\npayment of employees contribution of PF\nand ESI which was disallowed

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)

204 (Ahmedabad - Trib.) [PB : 5] laid down the ratio that where addition was made to income of assessee, being late payment of employees contribution of PF and ESI which was disallowed under section

M/S TRADITIONAL GALLERY PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

section 36(1)(iii) and disallowance of Rs. 33,83,847/- on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the IT Act. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT (A). The ld. CIT (A) confirming the order of the AO, sustained the addition of Rs. 91,15,011/-. Now the assessee

M/S TRADITIONAL GALLERY PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

section 36(1)(iii) and disallowance of Rs. 33,83,847/- on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the IT Act. Aggrieved by the order of the AO, the assessee preferred appeal before the ld. CIT (A). The ld. CIT (A) confirming the order of the AO, sustained the addition of Rs. 91,15,011/-. Now the assessee

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

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s. 10AA of the Act.\n4.6 So with those observations and relying on the order of the Malabar\nIndustiral Limited Vs. CIT and CIT Vs. Paville Projects P. Ltd., she held that\nthe assessment order passed u/s 153A dated 12/4/2021 passed by the AO\nis held to be erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial

SMT. SUMAN CHOUDHARY,JAIPUR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

204 ITR 443 (Guj), their Lordships of Gujarat High Court have observed that where matter can be disposed of by the Tribunal on the basis of material already on record, a remand should not be resorted to. It is always necessary to avoid multiplicity of proceeding and to save time." With this background, ground-wise submission is made as under

CASTAMET WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED,KHARWA vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR

disallowance u/s 14A of the Act as these expenditure are incurred purely for business purpose and not for making investments. 81. Accordingly, being satisfied with the basis of computation of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, the Ld.AO taken a plausible view on allowability of the same which is legally allowed as it is usual that interest free funds would

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS OM METALS SPML INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD), JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowing certain expenses debited to profit and loss statement of the appellant, being royalty expense, labour, cess, VAT composition tax and entry tax to achieve the said retention percentage. 2.2. Basis the order passed under section 92CA, the AO had completed the assessment under section 143(3) by passing an order dated 11th December 2017 by making total addition amounting

WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CEIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowing certain expenses debited to profit and loss statement of the appellant, being royalty expense, labour, cess, VAT composition tax and entry tax to achieve the said retention percentage. 2.2. Basis the order passed under section 92CA, the AO had completed the assessment under section 143(3) by passing an order dated 11th December 2017 by making total addition amounting

M/S. AJMER ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD.,AJMER vs. PR.CIT, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

204 ITR 856/[1994] 72 Taxman 223 (Ker.), the Kerala High Court has held as under: '4. The effect of Section 80AB is that, for the purpose of computing the deduction under Section 80L, the amount of income of that nature as computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act shall alone be deemed to be the amount

NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowed deduction claimed by assessee under section 80P - Assessee against impugned order filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of 11 days and sought condonation of delay in filing appeal stating that delay was due to non-availability of its legal consultant - Commissioner (Appeals) refused to condone delay and dismissed appeal in limine - Whether since filing an appeal

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONEROF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2, AJMER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

Bench: or at the time of hearing of this appeal.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

CHAMELI DEVI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

26. In view of the above discussion and findings, this appeal is partly allowed and the impugned order is set aside in the manner indicated above, while modifying the first mentioned addition of Rs

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 69A of the Act made an addition of Rs. 19,00,000/-, due to unexplained investment by purchasing a flat situated at Jaipur, during the financial year 2011-12. The Assessing Officer also disallowed a sum of Rs. 60,000/-, u/s 80C of the Act, due to the reason that the assessee had failed to support the claim regarding

SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA

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

disallowance and subsequent addition made u/s 56 accordingly. In the result, this ground of assessee’s appeal is allowed.” 6.1 As regards the claim u/s 80P(2)(d), we find that the only condition for availing the deduction under this provision is any income by way of interest or dividend derived by the Cooperative society from its investment with

SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMACHARIGAN SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED,KOTA vs. ITO, KOTA

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

disallowance and subsequent addition made u/s 56 accordingly. In the result, this ground of assessee’s appeal is allowed.” 6.1 As regards the claim u/s 80P(2)(d), we find that the only condition for availing the deduction under this provision is any income by way of interest or dividend derived by the Cooperative society from its investment with

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

204 ITD 203 (Visakhapatnam) (Trib.) Para 8 of the decision reads as under:- 8. We have heard both the parties and perused the material placed on record. Now the question before us is to decide whether the revenue is correct in disallowing deduction claimed by the assessee under s. 80P on interest earned on deposits pertaining to reserve fund with