VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowable under section 37(7k of disallowable under section 37(7k of 2 disallowance made by the disallowance made by the BP Part

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

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

37 of the Act. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 6,70,422/-.” Admittedly, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as compared to earlier years where the matter has been decided in favour of the assessee company. By respectfully following the order of the Coordinate Bench

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

37 of the Act. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 6,70,422/-.” Admittedly, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as compared to earlier years where the matter has been decided in favour of the assessee company. By respectfully following the order of the Coordinate Bench

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

37 of the Act. Therefore, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 6,70,422/-.” Admittedly, there is no change in the facts and circumstances of the case as compared to earlier years where the matter has been decided in favour of the assessee company. By respectfully following the order of the Coordinate Bench

M/S KANAK VRINDAVAN RESORTS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowance of 3 M/s Kanak Varindavan Resorts Ltd. vs. ITO expenses claimed by the appellant u/s 37 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, without pointing out any defect in the books of account regularly maintained by the appellant and duly audited, and without rejecting such books of account as required under section

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED,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

37(1) and/or as a business loss u/s 29 of the Act.\"\nIt is humbly submitted that on one hand the AO has already made disallowance of the entire\namount u/s 43B and on the other hand, the concerned customers/buyers are not paying the entire\namount of the GST, not only the amount of the GST but even the amount

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

37(1) and/or as a business loss u/s 29 of the Act.\"\nIt is humbly submitted that on one hand the AO has already made disallowance of the entire\namount u/s 43B and on the other hand, the concerned customers/buyers are not paying the entire\namount of the GST, not only the amount of the GST but even the amount

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS & FABRICATORS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOTA,KOTA vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-2, KOTA, KOTA

In the result the appeal of\nthe assessee in ITA no 199/JP/2025 is allowed for statistical purposes

37(1) and/or as a business loss u/s 29 of the Act.\"\nIt is humbly submitted that on one hand the AO has already made disallowance of the entire\namount u/s 43B and on the other hand, the concerned customers/buyers are not paying the entire\namount of the GST, not only the amount of the GST but even the amount

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)

Disallowance of CSR Expenditure – Clear Misinterpretation of Settled Law The assessee claimed deduction for CSR expenses, despite the statutory bar under Explanation 2 to Section 37

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRLCE-1, JAIPUR vs. M/S CUROSIS HEALTHCARE PRIVATE LIMITED , JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

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

section 37 of the Act, the expenditure of hotelstay of JRs. 1,17,1477- is disallowed and added back to the total

RAYS POWER EXPERTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

disallowed under the relevant sections that allow deductions, or under section 37, which is a residual section for business expenses

DCIT, CR-7, JAIPUR vs. SHRI ANIL GUPTA, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hearing” Dcit Vs. Shri Anil Gupta

37,270/- as professional promotion expenses in the P&L A/c which was to be disallowed as per section 37

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act being an expense prohibited by the law. This disallowance shall be made

RAMDULARI BANSAL WELFARE SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee society is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyal

section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act being an expense prohibited by the law. This disallowance shall be made

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALWAR vs. ASHOK SHARMA, REWARI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

Section 34 which is only the interest received for delay\nin making the payment after the compensation amount is\ndetermined. Thus, the interest u/s 28 is a part of the value of the\nland.\n6. The it. CIT (A) held that the interest received u/s 28 of the\nLand Acquisition Act, 1894 is not exempt under

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

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

Disallowance of CSR Expenditure – Clear Misinterpretation of Settled Law\n\nThe assessee claimed deduction for CSR expenses, despite the statutory bar under\nExplanation 2 to Section 37

MARVEL SUPPORT CONSULTANCY SERVICES,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRLCE, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed per ground

disallowed on adhoc basis expenses claimed by assessee under head conveyance and entertainment by assuming that there was disproportionate increase, since section 37