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

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

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

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

section 37(1), r.w.s. 40(a)(ii) of the Act and therefore, the amount of Rs.3,06,59,279/- claimed by the assessee as allowable deduction disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee. 3.3 During the scrutiny proceedings, the case was referred to the TPO for determination of Arm’s Length price with reference to all international

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

section 37(1), r.w.s. 40(a)(ii) of the Act and therefore, the amount of Rs.3,06,59,279/- claimed by the assessee as allowable deduction disallowed and added back to the income of the assessee.\n3.3 During the scrutiny proceedings, the case was referred to the TPO for determination of Arm’s Length price with reference to all international

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

section 275(1)(a). Hence the penalty order should have\nbeen passed before 31.10.2018 and therefore the penalty order dt.31.03.2019 passed by AO\nis clearly barred by limitation.\n\n6. On merits it is submitted that the penalty has been imposed by the AO for concealment of\nincome on two issues namely disallowance of CSR expenses and disallowance

PINK CITY JEWEL HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

ii) disallowance of 40a(ia) of the Act\n(iii) disallowance of ESI & PF for an amount of Rs. 4,93,814/- required to be\ndisallowed asthe provisions of u/s 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 2(24)(x) of the Act.\n(iv)& (v) Id. PCIT noted that the assessee disclosed investment in stock and\ntherefore, considering the provisions of section

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

section 37(1), \nr.w.s. 40(a)(ii) of the Act and therefore, the amount of \nRs.3,06,59,279/- claimed by the assessee as allowable deduction \ndisallowed and added back to the income of the assessee.\n3.3 During the scrutiny proceedings, the case was referred to the \nTPO for determination of Arm’s Length price with reference to all \ninternational

FATEHPURIA TRANSFORMERS AND WITCHGEARS PVT. LTD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

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

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

3) of the Act dated 21.02.2014, the AO disallowed a sum of Rs.19,93,833/- on a different ground and allowed deduction for the balance amount of Rs * 0.6 ,86,000/- At this juncture, it may be noted that, while computing deduction u/s.801A of the Act in respect of power generation unit, as envisaged u/s.801A

RENU KHUNTETA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD3(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

801A) after considering the disallowance of Rs. 410898/- made u/s 143(3) whereas the adjusted total income as per Sec. 115JC (2) should be Rs. 1837984/-(Rs. 0 plus deduction claimed under chapter VI A u/s 80IA of Rs. 1837984) as per the return income. The disallowance/addition made in the order u/s 143(3) Rs. 383014/- will not be considered

VENKATESHWARA WIRES PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Ld. Ao As Well As Before The Ld. Cit(A) As The Documents Submitted Was Only In Support Of Confirmations & Other Documents Already Submitted & No New Documents Were Submitted. 2. The Assessee Craves Your Indulgence To Add Amend Or Alter All Or Any Grounds Of Appeal Before Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act [ for short Act ]. 2 Venkateshwara Wires Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 2. In this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,95,25,000/- u/s 68 of the Income

AKSH OPTIFIBRE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, ALWAR

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

disallowed that claim, that view was upheld..........\n28. This court notices that there are not less than 100 instances. For instance. Section\n35A. 35AB (3), 35ABB, 35D (5): 35DDA; 358; 41 (1) (Any benefit accrued by the\namalgamated co.) from cessation of liability of amalgamating company shall be taxed in\nthe hands of the amalgamated company

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BANGUR NAGAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee - appellant in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

801A, in terms of Sec. 80-1A(8) and 80A(6) r.w.s 92F of the Act, the Arm's Length Price (ALP) of the power transferred was determined by considering the Average Annual Landed Cost (AALC) of power sold by the Grid during the year to the assessee and/or similarly placed nearby manufacturing units of independent assessee

FATEHPURIA TRANSFORMERS AND SWITCHGEARS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

ii) it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. If one of them is absent if the order of the ITO is erroneous but is not prejudicial to the revenue or if it is not erroneous but is prejudicial to the revenue recourse cannot be had to section 263(1). We submit that in this matter twin conditions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , JAIPUR vs. BHARAT SPUN PIPE AND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

3) - Subsequently, Assessing Officer issued a reopening notice under section\n148 on several grounds - Whether since impugned reopening notice issued under\nsection 148 was issued without a DIN, same was invalid and bad in law - Held, yes\n[Para 31] [In favour of assessee]\n\nIn the circumstances it is submitted that since there was no independent\napplication of mind