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

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act as under:- S. MF Investment Redemption Dividend Interest No Days Income Disallowed In INR Date In INR Date 1 Birla Sunlife 50,000,000 23-Jun-11 50,000,000 28-Jun-11 44,587.39 5 61,643.84 15-Apr-11 2 Reliance

MODERN INSULATORS LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

88,668/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 14A of the IT Act. The disallowance confirmed is illegal, unjustified and excessive. The only issue arises in this appeal is regarding disallowance made by the AO under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

disallowing or making an addition on such issue or subject matter. It is settled proposition of law as held in the series of decisions, some of which has been relied upon by the ld AR of the assessee and cited (supra) that the ld. CIT(A) while exercising its power for enhancement U/s 251 of the Act cannot bring

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

disallowing or making an addition on such issue or subject matter. It is settled proposition of law as held in the series of decisions, some of which has been relied upon by the ld AR of the assessee and cited (supra) that the ld. CIT(A) while exercising its power for enhancement U/s 251 of the Act cannot bring

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

disallowing or making an addition on such issue or subject matter. It is settled proposition of law as held in the series of decisions, some of which has been relied upon by the ld AR of the assessee and cited (supra) that the ld. CIT(A) while exercising its power for enhancement U/s 251 of the Act cannot bring

ZUBERI ENGINEERING COMPANY,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and that of revenue’s cross appeal is dismissed

disallowing or making an addition on such issue or subject matter. It is settled proposition of law as held in the series of decisions, some of which has been relied upon by the ld AR of the assessee and cited (supra) that the ld. CIT(A) while exercising its power for enhancement U/s 251 of the Act cannot bring

GIRNAR SOFTWARE PRIVATE LIMITED,6TH FLOOR, JAIPUR TEXTILE MARKET, B-2, NEAR MODEL TOWN, MALVIYA NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. PCIT – 2, JAIPUR, NEW CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 (“Rules”) • Deduction of tax at source on matching the expense debited in profit and loss account with the amounts reported in clause 34 of the tax audit report • Difference in the amount of unabsorbed business loss allowed to be carried forward

CAREER POINT LIMITED,KOTA, RAJASTHAN vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, UDAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

Section 263 of the I.T. Act under peculiar circumstances of this case alone. Thus keeping view the above deliberations, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.” Similar proposition was upheld in the following rulings: - (i) ITAT Delhi in the case of Braham Dev Gupta v. PCIT – [2017] 88 taxmann.com 831 (ii) Bombay High Court in the case

SHIIV VEG PRO PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA vs. CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTER, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 36(1)(va). No substantial question of law arises out of the impugned orders of the ITAT. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M-s State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.177-2011); Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitaran Nigam Ltd. (D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.189-2011), followed." 2.6 The Hon'ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench has also

SUBHASH PARETA,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and the revenue are disposed off with above directions

disallowance under section 40A(3) has been rightly deleted by the ld CIT(A). The ground no. 2 of revenue’s appeal is accordingly dismissed. 29. Regarding ground No. 3 of the Revenue’s appeal relating to deletion of addition on account of unexplained expenditure of Rs 1,18,34,723 under Section 69C, briefly the facts of the case

M/S AMRAPALI EXPORTS,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground No

88,647/- was added back to the total income of the assessee, being unexplained expenditure for the reason that the assessee was found indulging in obtaining accommodation entry of purchase of goods from bogus concern which was operated by Shri Rajendra Jain without any physical deliveries and such purchases amounting to Rs 7,54,587/- were treated as non genuine

A DAGA ROYAL ARTS,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 40A(3) of the Act” [CLC 24-15] 3.18.ii Hon’ble ITAT, Amritsar Bench in the case of Rakesh Kumar (2016) 46 CCH 270, pertaining to the AY 2010-11, pronounced on 09.03.2016 has held as under: “…In the present case, the genuineness of payment has not been doubted as Assessing Officer himself has held that sale deeds

AGRASEN ENGINEERING INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him.

Section 14A is not justified.” The SLP filed against the said judgment has been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-IV, Ahmedabad V. Sintex Industries Ltd (2018) 93 taxmann.com 24 (SC). (vii) Emtici Engineering Ltd. Versus ACIT (OSD). Anand Circle, Anand 2016 (3) TMI 186 - ITAT Ahmedabad. “It was noted from records

TRUWORTH INFOTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

section 14A r/w rule 8D worked out disallowance of Rs. 10,53,684/- and added the same in total income computed. The assessee made investment in shares of group companies amounting to Rs. 1,49,29,900(L.Y. Rs. 99,29,900) which are partly old investment carried forward from earlier years The paid up capital of assessee company

LALIT KUMAR ARORA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CR-2, , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessees is allowed

Bench: Furnishing The Return Of Income Under Section 139(1) Of The Act. When The Matter Was Taken To The Ld. Cit(A) The Said Disallowance Was Sustained.

section 139(1) of the Act. When the matter was taken to the Ld. CIT(A) the said disallowance was sustained. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned order issued U/s 143(1) of the IT Act, the assessee is preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee filed complete details of the entire payments i.e. employee

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)

section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short) and on 16.10.2019 by the Centralized Processing Centre and determined total income at Rs. 12,88,570/-thereby making an addition of Rs. 5,28,160/- on the returned income. Ld. CIT Appeal confirmed the addition. b) Aggrieved against the intimation, the assessee filed an appeal before

BAL SWAROOP AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(2)

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Us.

88,84,277/-. While completing the assessment under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Assistant Director, Income Tax, CPC determined the total income of the assessee at Rs. 89,55,259/- by making addition of Rs. 70,982/- on account of disallowance

ALSISAR HOTELS & RESORTS PVT LTD,JAIPUR vs. CIT APPEALS , CIRCLE-1 INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Us.

88,73,352/- which was processed U/s 143(1) and in terms of intimation dated Alsisar Hotels & Resorts Pvt. ltd. vs. DCIT 07.05.2020 issued by CPC, it made disallowance of Rs. 79,644/- towards employee’s contribution towards ESI and PF. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A), NFAC has confirmed the disallowance made U/s 143(1) on account of assessee