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

801A(8) r.w.s. 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The issue for consideration is as to what is the quantum by which deduction claimed u/s 10 AA by the SEZ Unit is to be reduced. The turnover, gross profit/gross profit rate, net profit and net profit rate disclosed by both SEZ Unit and Domestic Unit are as follows :- Unit

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

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

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

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

KISHAN GOPAL RUNGTA PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: The Order Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 12.01.2020 Ignoring That Audit Report In Form No. 10Ccb Was Filed On 22.04.2019. 2. The Appellant Craves To Alter, Amend & Modify Any Ground Of Appeal. 3. Necessary Cost Be Awarded To The Assessee.”

801A. It is a settled law that obtaining the audit report to claim exemption deduction wherever required by a section is a mandatory requirement but filing of the same is a procedural requirement and therefore, even when such report is filed before the completion of assessment, the requirement of the section as to the filing of the report should

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)

9 Fatehpuria Transformers and Switchgears Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT We submit that The Commissioner has to be satisfied of twin conditions, namely, (i) the order of the Assessing Officer sought to be revised is erroneous; and (ii) it is prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. If one of them is absent if the order of the ITO is erroneous

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

801A 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 Waste Management System 3. Whether

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AJMER

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

section (6) to provide that, with effect from 1-4-2012, the provisions of sub-section shall cease to have effect. Accordingly, a SEZ developer or any entrepreneur carrying on business in an SEZ unit (being a company) would be liable to pay MAT on the profits arising from the development of SEZ or the business carried

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

801A in respect to its Rail System. Considering the same, in my view no further disallowance is called for. 11.15 Considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and the material on record, and relying on the precedents cited above, I am of the considered view that applying the split of 65.52% on the basis

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

801A in respect to its Rail System. Considering the same, in my view no further disallowance is called for. 11.15 Considering the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and the material on record, and relying on the precedents cited above, I am of the considered view that applying the split of 65.52% on the basis

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD DEVELOPMENT & CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LTD.,SETU BHAWAN, JHALANA DOONGRI, JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

801A(4). Hence out of total claim of deduction of Rs.6,19,06,508/-, disallowance of Rs.46,70,000/- shall be made and the claim of deduction u/s 80IA shall be worked out accordingly to be restricted to Gross Total Income. Submission:- 1. At the outset it is submitted that National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi issued the notice

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

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

disallow a sum credited in the books to accounts\nof assessee u/s 68 of the Act, Id.AO shall record satisfaction as to the source and\nnature of the sum credited in the books of accounts of assessee either no proper\nexplanation was provided by assessee or explanation provided was not\n\n31\nITA No. 360/JPR/2025 & CO No. 19/JPR/2025\nBharat Spun