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

6. The ground no. 2 to 4 of appeal are in respect of single issue i.e. disallowance made\nunder provisions of section 43B of the Act in respect of Goods & Service Tax payable.\nThe short contention of the assessee is that GST amounting to Rs.3,55,01,693/- has not\nbeen routed through Profit and Loss account, therefore, no disallowance

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

6. The ground no. 2 to 4 of appeal are in respect of single issue i.e. disallowance made\nunder provisions of section 43B of the Act in respect of Goods & Service Tax payable.\nThe short contention of the assessee is that GST amounting to Rs.3,55,01,693/- has not\nbeen routed through Profit and Loss account, therefore, no disallowance

M/S RAMAVTAR KRISHANAVTAR,KOTA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

Section 43(5)(e) of the Act, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities on this issue and direct the AO to treat the loss of Rs. 4,69,47,808/- in said transaction as non- speculative business loss and accordingly allow set off of the same from other business income as per law. Thus, this ground

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)

disallowed under Section 43-B which, as stated above, was inserted with effect from 1-4- 1984 *** 22. It is important to note once again that, by the Finance Act, 2003, not only is the second proviso deleted but even the first proviso is sought to be amended by bringing about a uniformity in tax, duty, cess

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)

disallowed under Section 43-B which, as stated above, was inserted with effect from 1-4- 1984 *** 22. It is important to note once again that, by the Finance Act, 2003, not only is the second proviso deleted but even the first proviso is sought to be amended by bringing about a uniformity in tax, duty, cess

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)

disallowance of Rs. 43,272/- under section 11(1)(a) of the Act. 2. Your honor is requested kindly to order for Charging of tax as applicable u/s 2 of Finance Act, 2013 @ nil upto Rs. 2 Lacs and @10% on balance Rs. 45,210. 6

ASSOCIATED SOAPSTONE DISTRIBUTING CO PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

6 Furthermore, the Supreme Court in Sedco Forex\nInternational Drill. Inc. v. CIT, MANU/SC/2079/2005 : (2005) 12\nSCC 717 has held that a retrospective provision in a tax act which\nis \"for the removal of doubts\" cannot be presumed to\nbe retrospective, even where such language is used, if it alters or\nchanges the law as it earlier stood....”[Emphasis Supplied

M/S READY ROTI INDIA PVT. LTD.,F-28, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SARE KHURD, ALWAR vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-6 , JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

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

6. Liberty is granted to the ld AR to make all submissions in respect of allowability of disallowed contribution of the employees to PF and ESI under other relevant provisions in the interest of justice. This direction is being given because ld AR has submitted that as the amount is not allowable under section

M/S READY ROTI INDIA PVT. LTD.,F-28, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SARE KHURD, ALWAR vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

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

6. Liberty is granted to the ld AR to make all submissions in respect of allowability of disallowed contribution of the employees to PF and ESI under other relevant provisions in the interest of justice. This direction is being given because ld AR has submitted that as the amount is not allowable under section

M/S READY ROTI INDIA PVT. LTD.,F-28, RIICO INDUSTRIAL AREA, SARE KHURD, ALWAR vs. CPC, BANGALORE/ ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

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

6. Liberty is granted to the ld AR to make all submissions in respect of allowability of disallowed contribution of the employees to PF and ESI under other relevant provisions in the interest of justice. This direction is being given because ld AR has submitted that as the amount is not allowable under section

DEVIKA BUILDESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowed the professional fees of Rs. 27,00,000, primarily on the grounds that notices issued under section 133(6) to the recipient parties were returned undelivered marked as “not found”, “not available”, “unclaimed” and the Ld. AO found the explanations and evidences regarding the nature of services rendered to be vague and insufficient. Common Submission: A. Submission of Tangible

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)

section 43(6) as per rates prescribed. Ld.AO completed the assessment for AY 2013-14 vide orders dt. 28.03.2016 by re-computing depreciation by taking WDV as on 01.04.2012 as Actual Cost. Assessee preferred appeal against the disallowance

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)

section 43(6) as per rates prescribed. Ld.AO completed the assessment for AY 2013-14 vide orders dt. 28.03.2016 by re-computing depreciation by taking WDV as on 01.04.2012 as Actual Cost. Assessee preferred appeal against the disallowance

SODHANI SWEET PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

6 Sodhani Sweet Pvt. Ltd. vs.ACIT assessee as an employer by way of contribution towards a recognized provident fund”. However, the phraseology of Section 36(1)(va) differs from Section 36(1)(iv). It enacts that “any sum received by the assessee from any of his employees to which the provisions of sub-clause (x) of clause (24) of section

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

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

43,293/- on account of deduction u/s 80IA in respect of captive power plant. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A), NFAC,Delhi was justified in allowing the appeal of the assessee by deleting the disallowance of Rs. 3,18,12,93,748/- on account of deduction u/s 80IA on account of Solid

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

6,20,91,72,703/- granted to the appellant as capital receipt which are not exigible to tax while computing total income under normal provisions of the Act.\n6. That the appellant craves leave to add, to amend, modify, rescind, supplement or alter any of the Grounds stated here-in-above, either before or at the time of hearing

K.P. AIRTECH,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

6. During the course of hearing, the ld AR submitted that the assessee had collected a sum of Rs. 2,47,522 (A.Y 2018-19) and Rs. 2,48,335 (A.Y 2019-20) from its employees against their contribution towards Employees State Insurance and Provident Fund. As per provisions of ESI Act and PF Act all such contributions are required

K.P. AIRTECH,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

6. During the course of hearing, the ld AR submitted that the assessee had collected a sum of Rs. 2,47,522 (A.Y 2018-19) and Rs. 2,48,335 (A.Y 2019-20) from its employees against their contribution towards Employees State Insurance and Provident Fund. As per provisions of ESI Act and PF Act all such contributions are required