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

section 143(1)(a) of Income Tax Act, therefore, the adjustments so made are bad in law and should be deleted." 3. The fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee is engaged in the business of educational publication. For the impugned assessment year, return of income was filed admitting total income of Rs.5

SM WORKFORCE PRIVATE LIMITED,BHIWADI vs. ITO, WARD, BHIWADI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

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

254/- as the same has been paid in compliance with the provisions of The Income Tax Act, 1961 and ESI Act, 1948. 2. The ADIT, CPC has grossly erred in law in disallowing the amount of Rs 6,98,230/- under section 143 sub-section 1

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] on 15.01.2021. 2 Shree Cement Limited vs. ACIT 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: - “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(Appeals) was not justified and erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

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

disallowance of Rs.30,35,538/- being 10% of the amount of Rs. 3,03,53,582/- claimed as application of income. 3. First of all, we take up the appeal of the Department for adjudication in relation to the above mentioned grounds of appeal. 3.1 Apropos Ground No. 1 to 3 raised by the Department wherein

RADHAKISHAN BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 37(1) of the Act. 22. Further, ad-hoc disallowance of operating expenditure is not warranted in light of the following cases wherein it was held that no ad-hoc disallowance of any expenditure could be made by the assessing officer without pointing out any specific inflation or unvouched expenditure. • Your Honour's kind attention is drawn

RADHAKISHNA BENIWAL,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

section 37(1) of the Act. 22. Further, ad-hoc disallowance of operating expenditure is not warranted in light of the following cases wherein it was held that no ad-hoc disallowance of any expenditure could be made by the assessing officer without pointing out any specific inflation or unvouched expenditure. • Your Honour's kind attention is drawn

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)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group companies. Disallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society Department has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs. 82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to DAV Trust Management Society. ITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

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)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group companies. Disallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society Department has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs. 82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to DAV Trust Management Society. ITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

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)

254/- that was made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of amount of loans and advances to subsidiary/group companies. Disallowance of contribution to DAV Trust Management Society Department has also challenged deletion of addition of Rs. 82,10,270/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing contribution to DAV Trust Management Society. ITAT No. 1099/JPR/2024

SMT. BIRMA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms indicated

Bench: The Hearing Of This Appeal.”

section of s. 139. Hence, one cannot interpret that s. 139 mentioned should be read as s. 139(1). Similar language is appearing in s. 54(2). In the instant case, it is not disputed that sale consideration has been utilised before the date of filing of the return under s. 139(4). The assessee is entitled to exemption

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

section\n36(1)(iii) of the Act, we are constrained to remand the matter back to his file to\nexamine the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the\nassessee.\nThe Revenue has challenged the action of the Id CIT(A) in curtailing\ndisallowance out of interest paid to Rs.70,23,000/- (originally confirmed at\nRs.79.76 lakhs) as against that

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

section\n36(1)(iii) of the Act, we are constrained to remand the matter back to his file to\nexamine the matter afresh after providing reasonable opportunity to the\nassessee.\nThe Revenue has challenged the action of the Id CIT(A) in curtailing\ndisallowance out of interest paid to Rs.70,23,000/- (originally confirmed at\nRs.79.76 lakhs) as against that

SANJEEV AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed if the assessee does not file Form 67 within the due dates prescribed under Section 139(1) of the ITA. It is submitted that there are many sections in the ITA which specifically denied deduction or exemption or relief in case the return is not filed within the prescribed time frame. Attention is drawn toward Section 80AC, Section 80IA

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

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

ARJUN SINGH,KOTA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-I

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

disallowed in computing the total income of such person shall be deemed to represent the income in respect of which particulars have been concealed. As per the Proviso to this explanation, the onus to establish that the explanation was bonafide and facts relating to the same and material to the of his income have been disclosed by him will

M/S ORIENTAL POWER CABLES LTD.,KOTA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

Section 153A of the Act also supports the conclusion, which we have reached hereinbefore. 28. It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 that "it is well ITA Nos. 1096 to 1099, 1211, 1027 & 1028/JP/2018 & 44 CO 36, 37 & 50/JP/2018 DCIT Vs. M/s Oriental Power Cables

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S ORIENTAL POWER CABLES LTD., KOTA

Section 153A of the Act also supports the conclusion, which we have reached hereinbefore. 28. It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 that "it is well ITA Nos. 1096 to 1099, 1211, 1027 & 1028/JP/2018 & 44 CO 36, 37 & 50/JP/2018 DCIT Vs. M/s Oriental Power Cables

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. M/S ORIENTAL POWER CABLES LTD., KOTA

Section 153A of the Act also supports the conclusion, which we have reached hereinbefore. 28. It has been observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in K.P. Varghese v. ITO [1981] 131 ITR 597/7 Taxman 13 that "it is well ITA Nos. 1096 to 1099, 1211, 1027 & 1028/JP/2018 & 44 CO 36, 37 & 50/JP/2018 DCIT Vs. M/s Oriental Power Cables