CENTRE FOR DEVELOPMENT COMMUNICATION TRUST,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

section 11 & 12 of the Act. The\nregistration of the trust was again granted to the trust under new regime vide\nregistration dated 23.09.2021 (APB-88-90), that registration being in new law. The\nsubsequent observation on business activities and benefit to the specified person\nalso covered under the new law which does not warrant the rejection of the\nregistration

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

Section 194 and 200 were challenged. It was noted in P. RatnakarRao and others V. Govt. Of A.P. and others (1996 (5) SCC 359) that the discretion given under Section 200(1) to the State Government to prescribe maximum rates for compounding the offence is not unguided, uncanalised and arbitrary. It was, inter alia, held as follows: ……………….. ………………. It is indisputable

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)

41,42,000/-, in Para 11 of the assessment order, no penalty proceedings has been imitated with reference to this disallowance and therefore when AO has not recorded any satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings in respect of RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR disallowance of CSR expenses, the penalty imposed on this disallowance

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

disallowance made by the ld. AO on account of claim of Education Cess of Rs. 3,06,59,279/-. 18. During the course of hearing the ld. AR of the assessee openly admitted that the issue raised in ground no. 3 is already covered against the assessee in it’s own case vide order of this division Bench of Jaipur

RAJESH PRODUCTS,TONK ,RAJASTHAN vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

disallowance can be made only on the\nbasis of material collected during the search or requisition\n(emphasis supplied!\nFurther in para 14 Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:\n\"14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded\nas under\n(i)\n(ii)\n(iii) in case any incriminating material

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

41,025/-\nDeposit with Hirdai\nDeposits\nRs.33,275/-\nCommission income\nRs.70,612/-\nMisc. Income\nRs.2,210/-\nTotal\nRs.8,94,996/-\n6.2 Out of total disallowance of Rs 8,94,996/-, disallowance of Rs 8,22,174/- is on\naccount of interest received from SBI and other financial institutions. Hence, it is\nseen that the interest income

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

41,025/-\nDeposit with Hirdai\nDeposits\nRs.33,275/-\nCommission income\nRs.70,612/-\nMisc. Income\nRs.2,210/-\nकाव मल Total\nRs.8,94,996/-\n6.2 Out of total disallowance of Rs 8,94,996/-, disallowance of Rs 8,22,174/- is on\naccount of interest received from SBI and other financial institutions. Hence, it is\nseen that the interest income

THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN EMPLOYEES CREDIT & THIRFT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the results appeal of the assessee in ITA No

4) are not applicable to the Appellant. In such a situation, as per the\nprovisions of Section 80P(2)(d) of the Act, the Appellant is eligible for deduction of\nany income by way of interest or dividends derived by it from its investments with\nany other Co-operative societies only. In the instant case, the Appellant has\nearned interest

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

41,42,000/-, in Para 11 of the assessment order, no penalty proceedings has\nbeen imitated with reference to this disallowance and therefore when AO has not\nrecorded any satisfaction for initiation of penalty proceedings in respect of\n\n17\nRAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT & INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR\n\nITA NO.309 & 310/JPR/2025\n\ndisallowance

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

ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER vs. SHREE CEMENT LTD, BEAWAR

section 80IA(8) of the Act.\n30.10. Considering that TPO has disputed the Grid rate not to be\nthe market value in terms of provisions of Section 80A(6) of the\nAct, we would like to state here that that unlike Section 80IA(8),\nthe word \"OR\" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the\nAct

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, AJMER, AJMER

disallowance of Rs. 90,55,18,397/- on account of deduction u/s 80IA on account of Solid Waste Management System.\n78. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing of Pozzolana Portland Cement (PPC) and Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC). Apart from using gypsum and clinker as raw materials in the cement production, respondent also

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

41,03,200/-. The AO in his order assessed the\nincome of the assessee at Rs.5,61,08,400/- after making\ndisallowance u/s 36(1)(va) of the Act amounting to Rs. 16,46,879\n(i.e. Rs.15,51,701/- towards PF and Rs. 95,178/- towards ESI) due\nto the fact that contribution of EPF/ESI of employees contribution\nwas

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. NISHA JAIN, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed with no orders as to cost

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

41,413 11 Electricity Exp 4,70,637 3,55,837 1,14,800 17 8,17,444 6,44,593 1,72,851 Repair & Maintenance 18 Salary 49,60,000 36,15,060 13,45,000 24 Misc Exppenses 4,38,107 - 4,38,107 TOTAL 1,04,16,049/- 4.7 The aggregate of above referred three categories works

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)

disallowance u.s. 14A of Income Tax Act,1961 should be made. This fact can be easily verifiable from the Balance Sheet available before ld FAO. Ld PCIT has not specifically pointed out any credible defects in that. The ld. AO satisfied himself about the genuineness of the 27 Career Point Limited, Kota. explanation of assessee. When the legislature has empowered

NAVAL KISHORE ,KOTA vs. ACIT DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

4) of the Act which did not\nconstitute conclusive evidence and having been given under mental\nduress and pressure created by the search team and other 3 persons,\nwho had already admitted and offered in their statement in their\nwisdom to suit their purpose. Moreover, admission was not acted upon\n\nby not offering the income in the ROI filed

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. SH. NAVAL KISHORE, KOTA

4) of the Act which did not \nconstitute conclusive evidence and having been given under mental \nduress and pressure created by the search team and other 3 persons, \nwho had already admitted and offered in their statement in their \nwisdom to suit their purpose. Moreover, admission was not acted upon \nby not offering the income in the ROI filed