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)

249-274/Vol-2. Appeal filed by the revenue before Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur was dismissed. Copy of the order of Hon’ble ITAT Jaipur is at PB page 275-277/ Vol-2. (iii) AY 2017-18 The assessment of immediate preceding year AY 2017-18 was completed u/s 143(3) wherein no addition u/s 14A was made. The copy

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

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. 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

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

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

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

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

URMILA RAJENDRA MUNDRA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

In the result grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

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

section 271(1)(c). That is clearly not the intendment of the Legislature. 13 Urmila Rajendra Mundra vs. ITO 11. 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 in Tamil

TANUJ JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD-7(2),JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with no order as to cost

disallowance which\nbeing completely contrary to the provisions of law and facts may kindly be\ndeleted in full\n4. Rs. 1,50,137/-: The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well as in facts in\nconfirming the additions made by the AO of Rs. 1,50,137/ on account of\ndeduction claimed u/s 80E Chapter

M/S. OM SHIV PROPERTIES PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD -6(1), JAIPUR

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

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

249 of IT Act i.e. within 30 days from the date of service of assessment demand order. But due to not having knowledge about e-filing of the same and manner of e-filing of same, it could not be submitted that time and which is finally e-filed on dt. 16.1.2020 vide e-filing acknowledgement

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

249, read with sections 246A and 80P, of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 - Commissioner (Appeals) - Form of appeal and limitation (Condonation of delay) - Assessing Officer disallowed

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

disallowance of legal & professional, office,\nconsultancy, garden development expenses.\nSince these new issue/aspects arose in the very first assessment /\nintimation order u/s 143(1) dated 16.10.2018 only, wherein no such\naddition was made, thus any error, assuming if any (though not\nconceding but alternatively only), could have been found in that\nassessment order itself and limitation has to be reckoned

BIKANER DISTRIBUTORS P.LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

disallowing Entry Tax as per provisions of Section 43B on account of non-deposit of Entry tax. 8. The appellant prays your Honor’s indulgence to add, amend, modify or delete all or any ground of appeal. 2. Ground nos. 1 to 3 relate to dismissal of the appeal of the assessee for want of e-filing. These seven appeals

BIKANER DISTRIBUTORS P.LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

disallowing Entry Tax as per provisions of Section 43B on account of non-deposit of Entry tax. 8. The appellant prays your Honor’s indulgence to add, amend, modify or delete all or any ground of appeal. 2. Ground nos. 1 to 3 relate to dismissal of the appeal of the assessee for want of e-filing. These seven appeals

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

249, made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Club Expenses Department has also challenged the impugned order whereby Learned CIT(A) has deleted addition of Rs. 4,20,337/-, made by the Assessing Officer, while disallowing to the assessee, payment of club expenses. Loans and advances Department has also

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD., KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

249, made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Club Expenses Department has also challenged the impugned order whereby Learned CIT(A) has deleted addition of Rs. 4,20,337/-, made by the Assessing Officer, while disallowing to the assessee, payment of club expenses. Loans and advances Department has also

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS LTD, KOTA

Bench: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

249, made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of interest u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. Club Expenses Department has also challenged the impugned order whereby Learned CIT(A) has deleted addition of Rs. 4,20,337/-, made by the Assessing Officer, while disallowing to the assessee, payment of club expenses. Loans and advances Department has also