M/S TRIVENI QUALITY MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. In this behalf the observations of this court made in Sree Krishna Electricals v. State of Tamil Nadu [2009} 23 VST 249 as regards the penalty are apposite. In the aforementioned decision which pertained to the penalty proceedings under the Tamil Nadu General Sales

NIMBUS PIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

249 Fund Provident 2 9,416 52,770 15-06-2018 62,186 16-06-2018 Fund 5 Nimbus Pipes Limited Provident 225 15-11-2018 468 30-01-2019 3 243 Fund Provident 15-12-2018 1.710 30-01-2019 4 890 820 Fund Provident 93 86 15-12-2018 179 20-03-2019 5 Fund Provident

M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY INDIA LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-7(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

disallowance sustained by ld. CIT(A), M/s Silvex & Co. (India) Ltd. assessee has preferred present appeal, whereas department has preferred appeal in respect of relief allowed by ld.CIT(A). 10. The AO assessed the finding that theassessee is indulged in bogus purchasing from M/s Atharv Business Pvt. Ltd, of Rs. 2,13,72,050/-, M/s Casper Enterprises

ITO WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR vs. M/S. SILVEX & COMPANY G-1/35 TO 37, 47, 48 EPIP, JEWELLERY ZONE, SITAPURA INDUSTRIAL AREA, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and cross appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

disallowance sustained by ld. CIT(A), M/s Silvex & Co. (India) Ltd. assessee has preferred present appeal, whereas department has preferred appeal in respect of relief allowed by ld.CIT(A). 10. The AO assessed the finding that theassessee is indulged in bogus purchasing from M/s Atharv Business Pvt. Ltd, of Rs. 2,13,72,050/-, M/s Casper Enterprises

M/S MOUNT MALT BRU LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 69/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2013-14 M/S Mount Malt Bru Ltd. Cuke Ito, Vs. M-112, Mahesh Colony, Tonk Road, Ward 6(2), Jaipur (Raj)-302015. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 0950 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Ms. Chanchal Meena (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing: 19/10/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 27/10/2020 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)-2, Jaipur Dated 08/11/2018 For The A.Y. 2013-14 Wherein The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:

249 (Mumbai) Balarampur Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (2011) 140 TTJ UO (Kol) (UO) 73 6. We would also like to draw your kind attention that the Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT, 2015 held that The window for disallowance is indicated in Section

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

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

Section, tax is levied on the actual income of the previous year. It means that facts which existed during previous year are to be considered. When the assessee makes his purchases, he enters his stock at cost price on one side of the accounts. At the close of the year, he 9 ITA No. 311 & 420/JP/2014 323/JP/2016, CO. No. 07/JP/2016

JAIPUR SAHAKARI KRYA VIKRAYA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 5(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: The Registry On 30-06-2025. By Way Of First Mentioned Appeal, Assessee Has Challenged Order Dated 18-03-2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2018-19, Whereby Appeal Filed By Assessee Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 31-03-2021 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Has Been Dismissed, As Not 2

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P has been upheld. 2. By way of second appeal, assessee has challenged order dated 18-03-2025 passed by ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi , relating to assessment year 2018-19, whereby the appeal filed by the assessee has been dismissed for the same reason i.e. not maintainable, and thereby assessment order dated

JAIPUR SAHAKARI KRAYA VIKRAYA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 5(2), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

Bench: The Registry On 30-06-2025. By Way Of First Mentioned Appeal, Assessee Has Challenged Order Dated 18-03-2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2018-19, Whereby Appeal Filed By Assessee Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 31-03-2021 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Has Been Dismissed, As Not 2

disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P has been upheld. 2. By way of second appeal, assessee has challenged order dated 18-03-2025 passed by ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi , relating to assessment year 2018-19, whereby the appeal filed by the assessee has been dismissed for the same reason i.e. not maintainable, and thereby assessment order dated

SHRI VIKRAM SINGH SHEKHAWAT,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA No

disallowed by invoking provisions of section 154. Our view is further supported by the order of Hon’ble Chandigarh ITAT in the matter of S.R. Industries Ltd. Vs. ACIT Circle-3(1) Chandigarh in 156 ITD 125 wherein the reliance was placed on the decision of Calcutta High Court in 2006 284 ITR 42 9 Shri Vikram Singh Shekhawat

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

disallowance u/s 40A(3) of the Act, cannot be made in respect of transactions contained in such books of accounts which have been rejected, shall not be correct on facts of this case”. In this regard we submit as under:- (i) The ld AO was biased and acted vindictively, capriciously and perversely mentioned the above findings. Section