M/S SKYWAYS TOWNSHIP PVT LTD. 1/2 LIC FLATS, VIDYADHAR NAGAR, SECTOR-6, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee's appeal is allowed

disallowance of Rs. 42,00,000/- U/s 40A(3) of the Act.” 3 ITA No. 250/JP/2019 & 2 Ors. M/s Skyways Township Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT Grounds of ITA No. 251/JP/2019 A.Y. 2015-16. “ 1. On the facts & circumstances of the case Ld. Lower Authorities grossly erred in making and confirming addition

DCIT, C-4, JAIPUR vs. M/S. JLC ELECTROMET PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

section 9(1) (vil) so as to deemed to accrue or arise in India Revenue's Appeal dismissed." 8.7 NEC HCL System Technologies Ltd. vs. ACIT (2016) 46 CCH 0396 DelTrib "TDS-Non-deduction-Disallowance u/s 40a

WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CEIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowing certain expenses debited to profit and loss statement of the appellant, being royalty expense, labour, cess, VAT composition tax and entry tax to achieve the said retention percentage. 2.2. Basis the order passed under section 92CA, the AO had completed the assessment under section 143(3) by passing an order dated 11th December 2017 by making total addition amounting

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS OM METALS SPML INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD), JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowing certain expenses debited to profit and loss statement of the appellant, being royalty expense, labour, cess, VAT composition tax and entry tax to achieve the said retention percentage. 2.2. Basis the order passed under section 92CA, the AO had completed the assessment under section 143(3) by passing an order dated 11th December 2017 by making total addition amounting

JAIPUR TELECOM PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

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

9) of the Income Tax Act. Since all the grounds of appeal are interconnected, the same are canvassed together for the sake of convenience. Brief facts pertaining to the grounds of appeal are that penalty has been imposed on disallowance made vide order passed u/s 143(3), Rs.66,466/- on account of interest on TDS and Rs.19

JAIPUR TELECOM PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JPR, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

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

9) of the Income Tax Act. Since all the grounds of appeal are interconnected, the same are canvassed together for the sake of convenience. Brief facts pertaining to the grounds of appeal are that penalty has been imposed on disallowance made vide order passed u/s 143(3), Rs.66,466/- on account of interest on TDS and Rs.19

AMIT COLONIZERS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

section 40A(3) of the Act. As the payment disallowed are five different made by the assessee the same is discussed here after one by one. 8.1. As regards the disallowance of Rs. 99,000/- [ wrongly typed in the order as 9

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 is warranted and we uphold the findings of the CIT(A) and reject the ground of the Department. Ground No. 7 relates to allowing rent of Rs. 7,13,862/- paid to a person specified u/s 40A(2)(b). 23. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance is warranted and we uphold the findings of the CIT(A) and reject the ground of the Department. Ground No. 7 relates to allowing rent of Rs. 7,13,862/- paid to a person specified u/s 40A(2)(b). 23. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

disallowance is warranted and we uphold the findings of the CIT(A) and reject the ground of the Department. Ground No. 7 relates to allowing rent of Rs. 7,13,862/- paid to a person specified u/s 40A(2)(b). 23. This ground of the Revenue is covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal

ASHOK SHARMA,KOTA vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2 - KOTA, KOTA

disallowance was already made in the original opinion of the\nld. AO, amounting to Rs.8,000.\nIt may, thus, please be appreciated your honour(s) that earlier an opinion of 1%\ndisallowance was made, while under proceedings u/s 147/148 the opinion has changed.\n1.2) Opinion while issuing Notice for rectification of mistake apparent on record u/s 154\ndated 21/11/2017

MOTHERS EDUCATION HUB,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

40A(2)(b), we noticed that for making any disallowance under this section, the AO is under obligation to determine that the 9

M/S AMRAPALI EXPORTS,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground No

9 M/s Amrapali Exports, Jaipur Vs. DCIT, Jaipur about disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) of the Act which is succeeded by the word 'etc' wherein the circular has stated as under: "In computing the profits and gains of a business activity, the Assessing Officer may make certain disallowances, such as disallowances pertaining to sections 32, 40(a)(ia), 40A

MURLI DHAR UPADHYAY,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(3), JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, stands allowed

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

section 40A makes a provision for the disallowance of expenditure incurred in business and profession for which payment is made in an amount exceeding Rs. 2,500/- otherwise than by a crossed cheque drawn on a bank or a crossed bank draft. This provision will apply in respect of payments made after a 9

LALITA KUMARI,ANTA DISTRICT BARAN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), NFAC, DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 2(41) as per which a son of brother-in-law is not a relative. 3.) The AO further observed that the assessee had given interest @ 18% P.A. to the person covered u/s 40A(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which is more higher than the prevailing market rate i.e. maximum 12% 6 Lalita Kumari

M/S MORANI CARS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, WARD-6, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

section 40A(2)(b) and treated entire rent excessive. Entire expenses can not be excessive in any circumstances. I therefore, request to quashed the disallowance. 2. Addition u/s 40A(2)(b) of Rs. 2160000.00 (Grounds of appeal No 2 of A.Y. 2011-12) Ld . AO made an addition of Rs. 2160000/- @ 1% P.A. on Rs. 18000000/- of interest free advances

AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

40A of the Income-tax Act, for sub-section (3), the following sub-sections shall be substituted, with effect from the 1st day of April, 2009, namely:- "(3) Where the assessee incurs any expenditure in respect of which a payment or aggregate of payments made to a person in a day, otherwise than by an account payee cheque drawn

PRAKASH CHAND VARINDANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CERTAL CIRLCE-3, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance u/s.\n40A(3) the revenue observed clear violation of section 40A (3) of the Act\nand therefore, the addition is required to be sustained.\n12. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the orders of the lower\nauthority and material placed on record. The bench noted that the assessee\nis engaged in the wholesale and retail business