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)

disallowances under section 14A -Held, yes -Whether this by no stretch of imagination could be held to be 'misreporting' - Held, yes - Whether further, in absence of details as to which limb of section 270A was attracted and how ingredient of sub-section (9

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

disallowance under Section 14A.\n•\nIL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd. [2017] 84\ntaxmann.com 186 (Delhi) [CLC - Pages 7 to 9

URMILA RAJENDRA MUNDRA,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

In the result grounds raised by the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

9 to section 270A” the fact of AO cannot be considered for “MISREPORTING” and thus the AO was suppose to grant immunity u/sec. 270AA and this order of AO is requested to be quashed. The assessee has applied for immunity u/sec. 270AA by filing form 68 (Rule 129) which also has been denied by AO since considered such disallowances

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

disallowance made by the AO is illegal. Law does not allow the invocation of Section 40(a)(ia) for the cases of Section 194C(6) and 194C(7). In this he placed reliance on the judgement of ITAT Kolkata in the case of Soma Rani Ghosh Vs DCIT Kolkata, ITA No. 1420/KOL/2015. 9

GUNMALA JAIN,AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-2(2), AJMER, AJMER

Appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, AM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1262/JPR/2025 निर्धारणवर्ष / AssessmentYears :2019-20 Gunmala Jain, बनाम 28 Abhi Lash Nikunj, Kalyan Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2) Colony, Ajmer Road Kekri, Ajmer स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./ PAN/GIR No.: ABRPJ 4764E Ajmer अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assesseeby :Sh. Sunil Porwal, CA (Thr.V.C.) राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by : Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary (Addl. CIT) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 18/1

9), it is relevant to consider the provisions of law dealing with underreporting of income and misreporting of income as a consequence of underreporting. Section 270A (1) and (2) deal with the levy of penalty for underreporting of income, with sub-Section (1) empowering the competent authority to levy penalty for underreporting of income and sub-Section (2) specifying

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

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)

disallowance: Clause 21(b)-Amounts inadmissible under section 40(a),  Clause 21(d)-Disallowance/deemed income under section 40A(3),  Clause 21(f)-Any sum paid by the assessee as an employer not  allowable under section 40A(9

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

disallowance:\nclause 21(b)- Amounts inadmissible under section 40(a),\nclause 21(d)-Disallowance/deemed income under section 40A(3),\nclause 21(f)-Any sum paid by the assessee as an employer not\nallowable under section 40A(9

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)

9% Ledger A/c is at PB page 69-70 From above explanation of utilisation of fresh borrowings, it is crystal clear that no fresh borrowing has been utilised for investments which shall result the exempt income in current year as well as in future years. Accordingly, addition or disallowance under Section

M/S RAJASTHAN STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND INVESTMENT CORPORATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed as indicated hereinabove

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

section 275(1)(a). Hence the penalty order should have been passed before 31.10.2018 and therefore the penalty order dt.31.03.2019 passed by AO is clearly barred by limitation. 6. On merits it is submitted that the penalty has been imposed by the AO for concealment of income on two issues namely disallowance of CSR expenses and disallowance

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

9. It was submitted that provisions of section 143(1)(a) allows following types of adjustments to be made while processing the return of income:- i. Any arithmetical error ii. Any incorrect claim, if same is apparent from any information in return iii. Claim of set off of carried forward loss, if the return for the year of loss

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

9. It was submitted that provisions of section 143(1)(a) allows following types of adjustments to be made while processing the return of income:- i. Any arithmetical error ii. Any incorrect claim, if same is apparent from any information in return iii. Claim of set off of carried forward loss, if the return for the year of loss

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

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

In the result, the ground No

9 M/s Amrapali Exports, Jaipur Vs. DCIT, Jaipur about disallowance u/s. 40(a)(i) of the Act which is succeeded by the word 'etc' wherein the circular has stated as under: "In computing the profits and gains of a business activity, the Assessing Officer may make certain disallowances, such as disallowances pertaining to sections

RASHLEELA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance according to\nthe provisions of Rule 8D as applicable for the year under\nconsideration would be merely Rs. 2,118/- on account of indirect\nexpenses and nil on account of direct expenses as there were no\ndirectly attributable expenses.\nIn view of above, it is prayed that the order passed by ld.AO is neither\nerroneous nor prejudicial

SOHAN LAL TAMBI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD1(4), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

9. It was submitted that recently, a similar matter came before the Hon’ble ITAT, Agra Bench in the case of Mahadev Cold Storage v/s AO, Aligarh (ITA No. 41 & 42/Agr/2021 dated 14.06.2021) wherein also the issue was exactly similar that the AO while processing the return made disallowance of contribution received from employees which was deposited lately than prescribed

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Him.

9% on the investment made against share application money from 1.4.2008 to 28.8.2008 at Rs. 6,00,000/- and disallowed the same under section

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)

9 TRUWORTH INFOTECH PVT LTD. VS ITO , WARD 2(2), JAIPUR accounts were not maintained by assessee for investments and other expenditure incurred for earning tax free income.’’ It is worthwhile to mention that the assessee made the investments from its interest free funds/ income and it does not come under the purview of Section 14A to make disallowance