AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

disallowable the bench\nnoted as on 31.03.2019 Rs.1,72,47,207/- was outstanding and the\nassessee paid Rs.1,30,43,654/- on 30.10.2019 the same is allowable as\nper provision of section

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 145(3). 28.7. Assessee has also provided details of 2 comparable companies where their profit had also shown a reduction in AY 2012-13. CRISIL data also revealed that the entire industry was suffering. Assessee's entries in the books are based on invoice. Agents and dealers billed same rate to assessee. Further, the downward fall in gross profit

M/S. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 145(3). 28.7. Assessee has also provided details of 2 comparable companies where their profit had also shown a reduction in AY 2012-13. CRISIL data also revealed that the entire industry was suffering. Assessee's entries in the books are based on invoice. Agents and dealers billed same rate to assessee. Further, the downward fall in gross profit

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 145(3). 28.7. Assessee has also provided details of 2 comparable companies where their profit had also shown a reduction in AY 2012-13. CRISIL data also revealed that the entire industry was suffering. Assessee's entries in the books are based on invoice. Agents and dealers billed same rate to assessee. Further, the downward fall in gross profit

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

section 145(1) was applicable.” ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 33 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 8. This court, in the case of Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2007 (207) CTR 19, has held as under:- “Mere deviation in GP rate cannot be a ground for rejecting books of account and entering realm of estimate and guesswork

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

section 145(1) was applicable.” ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 33 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 8. This court, in the case of Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2007 (207) CTR 19, has held as under:- “Mere deviation in GP rate cannot be a ground for rejecting books of account and entering realm of estimate and guesswork

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

section 145(1) was applicable.” ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 33 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 8. This court, in the case of Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2007 (207) CTR 19, has held as under:- “Mere deviation in GP rate cannot be a ground for rejecting books of account and entering realm of estimate and guesswork

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

section 145(1) was applicable.” ITA 977 to 979/JP/2018 & 1122/JP/2018_ 33 Zuberi Engineering Vs DCIT. 8. This court, in the case of Malani Ramjivan Jagannath v. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 2007 (207) CTR 19, has held as under:- “Mere deviation in GP rate cannot be a ground for rejecting books of account and entering realm of estimate and guesswork

LALIT KUMAR ARORA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CR-2, , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

Bench: Furnishing The Return Of Income Under Section 139(1) Of The Act. When The Matter Was Taken To The Ld. Cit(A) The Said Disallowance Was Sustained.

section 2 applies. These amendments will take effect from 1st April, 2021 and will accordingly apply to the assessment year 2021-22 and subsequent assessment years.” 15. The present appeal is filed by the assessee against disallowance of Rs. 56,207

ITO, JAIPUR vs. GAJANAN TOWERS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: The Hearing.

disallowance made under section 40(a)(ia) and the addition/disallowance made under section 24(a) of Rs. 1,92,000/-. The ld. CIT (A) has though confirmed the levy of penalty, however, to the extent of 100% as against the 200% levied by the AO in respect of undisclosed sales of Rs. 5,04,985/- and the addition made under

RAJASTHAN EX-SERVICEMEN CORPORATION LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR INCOME TAX, CPC,, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 139(1) of the IT Act. It was submitted that the said fact is not 4 Rajasthan Ex-Servicemen Corpn. Ltd., Jaipur. under dispute and where such contribution has been deposited before the due date of filing of the return of income, no disallowance U/s 36(1)(va) of the Act can be made and in support thereof

CLASSIC AIRCON,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CPC / ITO, WD-5(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Hearing Of This Appeal.

section 139(1) of the IT Act. It was submitted that the said fact is not under dispute and where such contribution has been deposited before the due date of filing of the return of income, no disallowance U/s 36(1)(va) of the Act can be made and in support thereof, the ld. A/R submitted that recently the Coordinate

WHOLE SALE CLOTH MERCHANT ASSOCIATION ,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE KOTA , KOTA

section 12A(1)(b) states that: [(1)] The provisions of section 11 and section 12 shall not apply inrelation to the income of any trust or institution unless the followingconditions are fulfilled, namely:- (b)where the total income of the trust or institution as computedunder this Act without giving effect to [the provisions of section 11 andsection 12 exceeds

M/S. RATAN CONDUCTORS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1259/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Ratan Conductors, Cuke A.C.I.T., Vs. H-377(B), Road No. 17, Vki Area, Circle-4, Jaipur. Jaipur. Pan No.: Aabfr 8166 P Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Ashok Kr. Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 05/08/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 02/09/2021 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)-2, Jaipur Dated 21/08/2019 For The A.Y. 2012-13 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs. 17,73,769/- On Account Of Non Tds:- That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case Ld. Cit(A) Has Grossly Erred In Law & Facts In Confirming Disallowance Of Interest Of Rs.17,73,769/- Paid To M/S Barelays Investment & Loan (India) Ltd. (Rs. 298826/-) & M/S Future Capital (Rs. 1474943/-) On Account Of Non Deduction Of Tds Thereon By Invoking Provisions Of Section 40(A)(Ia) Of The It Act 1961. (A) The Assessee Firm Paid, Interest Of Rs. 2,98,826/- To Nbfc. M/S Barelays Investment & Loan (India) Ltd. & Rs.14,74,943/- To M/S Future Capital Another Nbfc. The Assessee Firm Raised Loan

section 40 (a) (ia) of the Act, the disallowance shall be restricted to 30% of the amount of expenditure claimed." The Finance Minister while introducing the amendment in Para 207

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORTATION LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenues are dismissed

207,94& 208/JP/2015 income from the Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund, income contributed by Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund and dividend income from shares. The Assessing Officer has invoked the provisions of Section 14A r.w.r 8D and made disallowance

RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORP. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenues are dismissed

207,94& 208/JP/2015 income from the Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund, income contributed by Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund and dividend income from shares. The Assessing Officer has invoked the provisions of Section 14A r.w.r 8D and made disallowance

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORTATION LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenues are dismissed

207,94& 208/JP/2015 income from the Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund, income contributed by Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund and dividend income from shares. The Assessing Officer has invoked the provisions of Section 14A r.w.r 8D and made disallowance

RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORP. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeals of the Revenues are dismissed

207,94& 208/JP/2015 income from the Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund, income contributed by Rajasthan Venture Capital Fund and dividend income from shares. The Assessing Officer has invoked the provisions of Section 14A r.w.r 8D and made disallowance