AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,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

Disallowance under Section 43B of the Act: The appellant has\nclaimed that an amount of Rs. Rs 1,72,59,150/- was GST due as on 31.03.2019,\nout of which Rs 1,30

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance of only Rs. 70.23 lakhs. The Tribunal, while principally approving the finding of the CIT(A), remanded the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to examine the applicability of section 36(1)(iii). The matter is still pending before the CIT(A). 30

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance of only Rs. 70.23 lakhs. The Tribunal, while principally approving the finding of the CIT(A), remanded the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to examine the applicability of section 36(1)(iii). The matter is still pending before the CIT(A). 30

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

disallowance of only Rs. 70.23 lakhs. The Tribunal, while principally approving the finding of the CIT(A), remanded the matter back to the file of the CIT(A) to examine the applicability of section 36(1)(iii). The matter is still pending before the CIT(A). 30

GIRNAR SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,6TH FLOOR, JAIPUR TEXTILE MARKET, B-2, NEAR MODEL TOWN, MALVIYA NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. PCIT – 2, JAIPUR, NEW CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING

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)

disallowance under section 14A of the Act. 3. Necessary cost be awarded to the assessee. Ground No. 1 & 2 raised by the assessee are inter-connected and inter- related against the order passed under section 263 of the IT Act, 1961 and thereby directing the AO to make addition of Rs. 66,30

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 40(a(ia). We request for total deletion of said disallowance first and alternatively we pray for 30% disallowance

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 40(a(ia). We request for total deletion of said disallowance first and alternatively we pray for 30% disallowance

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 40(a(ia). We request for total deletion of said disallowance first and alternatively we pray for 30% disallowance

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 40(a(ia). We request for total deletion of said disallowance first and alternatively we pray for 30% disallowance

SUPREME BUILDESTATES PVT LTD,MADANGANJ- KISHANGARH vs. DCIT CIRCLE 2 AJMER, JAIPUR ROAD AJMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed by new Explanation 2 to section 37(1), while computing Income under the Head Income from Business and Profession'. Further, clarification regarding impact of Explanation 2 to section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act in Explanatory Memorandum to The Finance (No.2) Bill, 2014 is as under: “The existing provisions of section 37(1) of the Act provide that

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S. JAGDAMBE STONE COMPANY, BHARATPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

disallowed the Freight Expenses of Rs. 1,44,13,853/- [30% of 4,80,46,176/-] by wrongly invoking the Section

SUBHASH PARETA,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are disposed off with above directions

30 to 43D. Section 40 provides for certain disallowances in certain cases notwithstanding that those amounts are allowed generally under

GANGAUR EXPORTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result grounds raised by the assessee are allowed and order of Ld

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

sections 30 and 36 of the Act, and suo moto disallowed the same by adding it back to the profit

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)

30 & 31 for your kind perusal. Disallowance under Section 14A is not attracting in the case of assessee. 2.7 The Utilisation

M/S DANISH PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

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

disallowance is called for under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. However, since these declarations were not verified by the AO, therefore, for this limited purpose we set aside the issue to the record of the AO to verify the correctness and genuineness of the declaration. Ground No. 3 is regarding an addition

THIKARIYA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD ,THIKARIYA vs. AO CPCITO WARD SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

30, 2019, as per Section 139(1) of the Act. In accordance with the provisions of Section 80AC(ii) of the Act, which apply to AYs 2018-19 and onwards, the appellant is clearly ineligible to claim the exemption under section 80P of the Act. 6.9 Hence, there is no flaw in the AO's decision to disallow

AMIT SINGH,BHIWADI (ALWAR) vs. DCIT, CPC- BENGALURU, CPC- BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

30] [In favour of revenue] Amit Singh vs. DCIT, CPC 6.4 The head note of the decision of High Court of Gujarat in case of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation [2014] 41 taxmann.com 100 (Gujarat) is as under: "Section 43B, read with section 36(1)(va) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Business disallowance

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

section 14A will also apply on the shares held as stock in trade. Thus simply because disallowance is confirmed in appeal does not mean that the assesse has concealed the particulars of income. All the facts relating to the investment in shares and exempt income earned therefrom are duly shown in the financial statement which was not found incorrect