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

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

7 Assessment year 2010-11 - Whether section 36(1)(va) and section 43B(b) operate in different fields i.e. former takes care of employee's contribution and latter employer's contribution Held, yes - Whether, therefore, an assessee is entitled to get benefit of deduction • under section 43B(b) as provided under proviso thereto only withtregard .tosportien amount paid by employer

M/S. RAMBHOJO'S,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance of certain expenses. The ld AO levied penalty of Rs. 57,33,335/- under clause (a) of section 271AAB(1) @ 10% of Rs. 5,73,33,348/- being income surrendered in search as recorded in statement u/s 132(4) and of Rs. 35,408/- under sub clause (b) of section 271AAB (1) of Act @ 20% of Rs. 1

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)

7. Section 143(1)(a)(iv) i. It is submitted that u/s 143(1)(a)(iv) only a claim/expenditure whose disallowance has been indicated in the audit report but the same not been taken into account in computing the total income in the return can be adjusted while processing the return of income. 18 VAIBHAV GLOBAL LTD VS DCIT, CIRCLE

ARAVALI BUILDHOMES LLP,JAIPUR vs. AO CPC, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

B” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 1154/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2021-22 cuke Aravali Buildhomes LLP AO CPC, Vs. F. No. 205 Block A, Anukamapa Jaipur

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

7. It is further submitted that provisions of section 143(1)(a)(iv) can be invoked with reference to other clauses like, for example, the following wherein the auditor is required to express his opinion with reference to disallowance: clause 21(b

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHARATPUR vs. M/S. JAGDAMBE STONE COMPANY, BHARATPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

B and such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction, has not been paid on or before the due date specified in sub- section(i) of Section 139". Section 194C/3): No deduction shall be made under sub-section (1) or sub- section(2) from (1) the amount of any sum credited or paid or likely to be credited

THIKARIYA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD ,THIKARIYA vs. AO CPCITO WARD SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

B, 80-IC, 80-ID, or section 80-IE if the return is furnished beyond the due date specified under sub- section (1) of section 139, or (vi) Addition of income appearing in Form 26AS or Form 16A or Form 16 which has not been included in computing the total income in the return Provided that no such adjustments shall

PRATAP TECHNOCRATS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU/ DCIT, CR.1 JAIPUR, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

7. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In the present cases, it is not in dispute that the assessees deposited the contribution of PF & ESI belated in terms of Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.Vs. ADIT & Ors. appeals section 36(1)(va) of the Act, however, the said deposits were made

THE EARTH HOUSE RESORTS LLP, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD-2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

7. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In the present cases, it is not in dispute that the assessees deposited the contribution of PF & ESI belated in terms of Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.Vs. ADIT & Ors. appeals section 36(1)(va) of the Act, however, the said deposits were made

JAIRAJ,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

7. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In the present cases, it is not in dispute that the assessees deposited the contribution of PF & ESI belated in terms of Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.Vs. ADIT & Ors. appeals section 36(1)(va) of the Act, however, the said deposits were made

PRAHLAD NARAYAN BAIRWA,JAIPUR vs. ADIT,CPC,BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

7. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In the present cases, it is not in dispute that the assessees deposited the contribution of PF & ESI belated in terms of Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.Vs. ADIT & Ors. appeals section 36(1)(va) of the Act, however, the said deposits were made

JAIRAJ,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

7. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In the present cases, it is not in dispute that the assessees deposited the contribution of PF & ESI belated in terms of Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.Vs. ADIT & Ors. appeals section 36(1)(va) of the Act, however, the said deposits were made

JAIRAJ,JAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, all these appeals of the assessees are allowed

7. We have considered the submission of both the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. In the present cases, it is not in dispute that the assessees deposited the contribution of PF & ESI belated in terms of Pratap Technocrats Pvt. Ltd.Vs. ADIT & Ors. appeals section 36(1)(va) of the Act, however, the said deposits were made

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

7. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material on record. In\r\nthe instant facts, admittedly the assessee did not file return of income within the\r\ntime permissible under section 139(1) of the Act. However, the assessee filed its\r\nreturn of income belatedly on 30-11-2020 and claimed deduction

AMBA TECH ENGINEERING,JAIPUR vs. ITO, BHIWADI

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

b) of section 43B. According to it, if any sum towards employer's contribution to any provident fund or superannuation fund or gratuity fund or any other fund for the welfare of the employees is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date for furnishing the return of the income under sub-section (1) of section

BECKHAUL DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

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

B” JAIPUR JhlanhixkslkbZ]U;kf;dlnL; ,oaJhjkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 97/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2020-21 cuke M/s. Beckhaul Digital Technologies (P)Ltd.B- The ITO 21, Shakti Bhawan, Shivaji Colony, Vs. Ward 1(1) Khatipura Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur Jaipur LFkk

TRANSINDIA NONWOVENS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

b) of section 43B. According to it, if any sum towards employer's contribution to any provident fund or superannuation fund or gratuity fund or any other fund for the welfare of the employees is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date for furnishing the return of the income under sub-section (1) of section

DOLCAS BOTANOSYS PVT. LTD. BIKANER,BIKANER vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGLORE/ACIT, C-1 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

b) of section 43B. According to it, if any sum towards employer's contribution to any provident fund or superannuation fund or gratuity fund or any other fund for the welfare of the employees is actually paid by the assessee on or before the due date for furnishing the return of the income under sub-section (1) of 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)

disallowance made U/s 143(1) on account of assessee’s failure to pay the employee’s contribution of PF/ESI within the prescribed due dates as per Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. 6. Being aggrieved by the order issued U/s 143(1) of the IT Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee filed