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 270A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act] by the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2 (2), Ajmer. 2 Urmila Rajendra Mundra vs. ITO 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “That Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has wrongly confirmed the levy of penalty u/s 270A of Rs. 2,03,488/- considering disallowances

NARAIN LAL AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

270A. Therefore the ground\nraised is dismissed.\nGround No. 3: The appellant craves the right to add, delete or amend any of the\ngrounds of appeal either before or at the time of hearing of appeal.\nThis is a general ground raised that does not require adjudication.\n6.\nIn the result, the appeal of the appellant is treated as dismissed

GUNMALA JAIN,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1262/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears :2019-20 Gunmala Jain, बनाम 28 Abhi Lash Nikunj, Kalyan Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2) Colony, Ajmer Road Kekri, Ajmer स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./ PAN/GIR No.: ABRPJ 4764E Ajmer अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assesseeby :Sh. Sunil Porwal, CA (Thr.V.C.) राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary (Addl. CIT) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/1

Section 270A of the Act. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under:- 2 Gunmala Jain 1. The ld. CIT(A) confirming the penalty u/sec. 270A at Rs.33,280/- (200%) is bad in law. Penalty levied on suo motto disallowance

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)

270A for AY 2020- 21 in my mobile on 14.06.2025. At that time when I browsed the e-filing portal of society, it came to my notice that the appellate orders for AY 2017-18, 2020-21 & 2021-22 has been passed. 6. When I consulted my CA, it was advised to file the appeal against these orders for which

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

270A for AY 2020-\n21 in my mobile on 14.06.2025. At that time when I browsed the e-filing portal of\nsociety, it came to my notice that the appellate orders for AY 2017-18, 2020-21 &\n2021-22 has been passed.\n6. When I consulted my CA, it was advised to file the appeal against these orders\nfor which

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

270A for AY 2020-\n21 in my mobile on 14.06.2025. At that time when I browsed the e-filing portal of\nsociety, it came to my notice that the appellate orders for AY 2017-18, 2020-21 &\n2021-22 has been passed.\n6. When I consulted my CA, it was advised to file the appeal against these orders\nfor which

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR, ALWAR vs. MAN MOHAN KRISHNA, ALWAR

18. As a result, this appeal deserves to be dismissed

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

2. Vide impugned order, Learned CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, and thereby set aside the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 270A of the Act. 3. The Assessing Officer, vide assessment order dated 29.01.2022 levied penalty to the tune of Rs. 52,40,694/-, while recording finding that the assessee had under-reported

SUNIL CHABLANI,AJMER, RAJASTHAN vs. CIRCLE (INTL TAX), JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

disallowed due to\nreason that assessee has failed to submit any documentary evidence in support\nof his claim. Therefore, the whole consideration of Rs. 69,90,000/- is considered\nas Long Term Capital Gain in the hands of the assessee. Penalty proceedings\nu/s 270A of the Act is initiated on this issue for underreporting of income.\nFurther, the assessee

PRADEEP SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

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

2 of the appeal is dismissed.\n6.\nGround No. 3 is with regard to disallowance of consultancy expenses and other\nexpenses.\n6.1 The AO in the assessment order, it is submitted that out of consultancy\nexpenses of Rs.1,52,247/-, disallowance of Rs.18,285/- has been made.\nSimilarly, the Id. AO has disallowed expenses worth Rs.1

SHRI SHYAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

2) of the Act and is not excluded from the same as per Section 270A(6) of the Act. The assessee has been unable to demonstrate as to how still addition made to its income on estimation basis does not qualify for levy of penalty u/s. 270A of the Act. Further with respect to the penalty levied on the addition

SHRI SHYAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD 1(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member)

2) of the Act and is not excluded from the same as per Section 270A(6) of the Act. The assessee has been unable to demonstrate as to how still addition made to its income on estimation basis does not qualify for levy of penalty u/s. 270A of the Act. Further with respect to the penalty levied on the addition

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

disallowance of the deduction under Section 80P was not justified solely because the return was filed belatedly. Referring to various judicial precedents and circulars, it was noted that the provisions of Section 80AC, as amended from time to time, and the applicability of Section 143(1)(a)(v) did not support the denial of deduction in this case, especially considering

INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA vs. KOTA KARAMACHARI SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED, KOTA

Appeal is allowed

Section 80P(2)(a)(i) of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961. Further, Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of\nState Bank of India vs. CIT (72 Taxmann.com 64), Hon'ble High Court of\nKarnataka in the case of PCIT vs. Totagars (83 Taxmann.com 140) (Date of\norder 16.06.2017), Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana

J.S.FOURWHEEL MOTORS (P) LTD ,ALWAR vs. ACIT. CIRCLE 1 ALWAR, ALWAR

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

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

2. Ex-parte assessment order That the ld. AO has erred in law as well as on the facts and circumstances of the case in framing an order under section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, whereas the assessee company has submitted all the desired information, details and evidences through online mode, before framing of the assessment order

SINCERE ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRLCE-7, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal no

2) A person shall be considered to have under-reported his income, if-\n(a)\nthe income assessed is greater than the income determined in the return\nprocessed under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143;\n(b)\nthe income assessed is greater than the maximum amount not chargeable to\ntax, where no return of income has been

SINCERE ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal no

2) A person shall be considered to have under-reported his income, if-\n(a)\nthe income assessed is greater than the income determined in the return\nprocessed under clause (a) of sub-section (1) of section 143;\n(b)\nthe income assessed is greater than the maximum amount not chargeable\nto tax, where no return of income has been

SAKET AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

270A of the Act.\n6. That further submissions in support of appeal shall be made at the time of\nhearing.\n7. That appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter all or any grounds of\nappeal before or at the time of hearing.\nTheGroundsofAppealarediscussedinDetailasperbelow:-\n1. ThatorderofLearnedAssessingAuthorityisbadinlaw,illegalandagainstf\nactsandcircumstancesofthecase.\ni) That the SCN issued on Dt 19-04-2021 for hearing

JAMBO CREDIT AND THRIFT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO-6(1),, JAIPUR

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal Feeling Aggrieved By Order Dated 12.06.2024, Passed By Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2018-19, As Thereby The Appeal Filed By The Appellant Has Been Dismissed.

2. Expenses that TDS has not been deducted as its not applicable. (13,43,475). Thus, as provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 30% of above two items Le. 30% of Rs.24.19.595/- which comes to Rs.7.25,878/- is disallowed and added to total income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s 270A