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

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

43,384/-\nu/s 43B: (CIT(A) Pg. 5, Pr. 6).\n1. 5. Issue Debatable: In case there is a contrary view, the issue becomes\ndebatable and as per settled law a view favorable to the Assessee should be\nadopted as held in Vegetable products.82 ITR 192 (SC)\n15\nITA Nos.197 to 199/JP/2025\nAhluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Pvt. Ltd.\n4. Allowable

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

43,384/-\nu/s 43B: (CIT(A) Pg. 5, Pr. 6).\n1. 5. Issue Debatable: In case there is a contrary view, the issue becomes\ndebatable and as per settled law a view favorable to the Assessee should be\nadopted as held in Vegetable products.82 ITR 192 (SC)\n15\nITA Nos.197 to 199/JP/2025\nAhluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Pvt. Ltd.\n4. Allowable

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

43,384/-\nu/s 43B: (CIT(A) Pg. 5, Pr. 6).\n1. 5. Issue Debatable: In case there is a contrary view, the issue becomes\ndebatable and as per settled law a view favorable to the Assessee should be\nadopted as held in Vegetable products.82 ITR 192 (SC)\n14\nITA Nos.197 to 199/JP/2025\nAhluwalia Erectors & Fabricators Pvt. Ltd.\n4. Allowable

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

43 ITA 1361 & 1362/JP/2018 & 357/JP/2019_ DCIT(E) Vs M/s Modern School Society status then the same cannot be said to be a undue benefit to attract the provisions of section 13(3) of the Income Tax Act." Thus where the Hon'ble ITAT has treated the salary paid to these persons as reasonable, the disallowance made by the Assessing officer

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

43 ITA 1361 & 1362/JP/2018 & 357/JP/2019_ DCIT(E) Vs M/s Modern School Society status then the same cannot be said to be a undue benefit to attract the provisions of section 13(3) of the Income Tax Act." Thus where the Hon'ble ITAT has treated the salary paid to these persons as reasonable, the disallowance made by the Assessing officer

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE, JAIPUR vs. MODERN SCHOOL SOCIETY, KOTA

In the result, this appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1361 & 1362/Jp/2018 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 357/Jp/2019 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Modern School Society, Vs. Income Tax (Exemptions) Sector-A, Talwandi, Kota Circle, Jaipur. (Rajasthan) Pan No.: Aaatm 7045 H Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Rajiv Sogani (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 21/12/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur Dated 04/09/2018 & 12/12/2018 For The A.Y. 2011-12 To 2013-14 Respectively.

43 ITA 1361 & 1362/JP/2018 & 357/JP/2019_ DCIT(E) Vs M/s Modern School Society status then the same cannot be said to be a undue benefit to attract the provisions of section 13(3) of the Income Tax Act." Thus where the Hon'ble ITAT has treated the salary paid to these persons as reasonable, the disallowance made by the Assessing officer

OCEAN EXIM INDIA PRIVATE LTD,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

5. Income Tax vs. M/s State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (2014) 363 ITR 70 (Raj) iv. DCIT vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. the ITAT Jaipur Bench ‘B’ ITA No. 1287/JP/2019 Jan 18, 2021 (2021) 61CCH 0057 Jaipur Trib v. So your honour the impugned ESI/PF disallowance is requested to order to delete the addition. Kindly allow the assessee

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

5,190,000,00 4,740,000,000 0 6,298,799.79 Total 9,014,794.52 19. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee preferred appeal before the ld the CIT(A). The ld. CIT (A) referred to his earlier order where an addition was deleted as the AO had failed to establish any nexus between borrowed funds

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

5,190,000,00 4,740,000,000 0 6,298,799.79 Total 9,014,794.52 19. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee preferred appeal before the ld the CIT(A). The ld. CIT (A) referred to his earlier order where an addition was deleted as the AO had failed to establish any nexus between borrowed funds

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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

5,190,000,00 4,740,000,000 0 6,298,799.79 Total 9,014,794.52 19. Aggrieved by the order of the A.O., the assessee preferred appeal before the ld the CIT(A). The ld. CIT (A) referred to his earlier order where an addition was deleted as the AO had failed to establish any nexus between borrowed funds

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

disallowance can be made towards employees' contribution to provident fund & ES/C." 6. The assessee before the ld. CIT(A) also contended that the amendment brought in by the Finance Act, 2021 in Section 36(1)(va) of the Act and has also referred to the rationale of the amendment as explained by the memorandum in the Finance Bill

SETH RB MOONDHRA MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BANI PARK ,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION(1), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

43,272/- under section 11(1)(a) of the Act on account of amount accumulated or set apart for charitable or religious purpose. That the said disallowance has been made despite the same has been accumulated in the manner as provided in section 11(5

MANJEET SINGH DUGGAL,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

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

disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is in accordance with the provisions of Section 73 of the Act. 14. Now, the assessee is in appeal before us. During the course of hearing, the ld AR took us through the definition of speculative transactions as defined in Section 43(5

RMC GEMS INDIA LTD,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance of Rs. 3,93,122/- made by Ld. AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) may kindly be deleted.’’ 4.6 On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 4.7 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noted during the course of hearing that

NIRMAL KUMAR BARDIYA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance of Rs. 3,42,412/- made by Ld. AO and confirmed by Ld. CIT(A) may kindly be deleted.’’ 4.6 On the other hand, the ld. DR supported the orders of the lower authorities. 4.7 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench noted during the course of hearing that

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. NAVRATAN VIDHA MANDIR SHIKSHA SAMITI, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result appeal filed by the Department is dismissed and the C

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

Section 145(3) and made 20% disallowance which comes to Rs.60,70,716/- being unverifiable expenses and thus made the addition in the hands of the assessee which in first appeal the ld. CIT(A) reduced the expenses to the extent of 10% and thus restrict addition at Rs.30,35,358/-. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee

NIMBUS PIPES LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

5) TMI 222] Held that: Thus, we are of the view that where the PF and/or EPF, CPF. GPF etc., if paid after the due date under respective Act but before filing of the return of income under Section 139(1), cannot be disallowed under Section 43B or under Section