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)

disallowance of ‘Health & Education Cess’, the same is therefore not required to be added back to compute book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. 13.7 He also submitted that unlike regular taxes, cess is imposed for specific purposes, such as funding education, healthcare or other welfare initiatives. The revenue collected through cess is exclusively utilised for its intended purpose

ACIT, ALWAR vs. VIJAY SOLVEX LIMITED, ALWAR

In the result, revenue’s appeal as well as the C

TP adjustment separately as under: (i) The adjustment in respect of international transaction for purchase of bakery shortening: The TPO rejected the Resale Price Method as most appropriate method and adopted TNMM as most appropriate method and carried out a fresh search. The TPO has selected 10 comparables with mean margin of 4.75% as under: Annual (ending March

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. M/S WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD(PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS OM METALS SPML INFRAPROJECTS PVT LTD), JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowing certain expenses debited to profit and loss statement of the appellant, being royalty expense, labour, cess, VAT composition tax and entry tax to achieve the said retention percentage. 2.2. Basis the order passed under section 92CA, the AO had completed the assessment under section 143(3) by passing an order dated 11th December 2017 by making total addition amounting

WORSHIP INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CEIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result of the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

disallowing certain expenses debited to profit and loss statement of the appellant, being royalty expense, labour, cess, VAT composition tax and entry tax to achieve the said retention percentage. 2.2. Basis the order passed under section 92CA, the AO had completed the assessment under section 143(3) by passing an order dated 11th December 2017 by making total addition amounting

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

TP adjustments. The adjustment so made are as under:\na) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on power undertakings for an amount of Rs. 2,70,66,00,914/-.\nb) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Solid Waste Management System for an amount of Rs. 90,55,18,397/-.\nc) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Water Treatment

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

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

TP adjustments. The adjustment so made are as under: a) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on power undertakings for an amount of Rs. 2,70,66,00,914/-. b) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Solid Waste Management System for an amount of Rs. 90,55,18,397/-. c) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Water Treatment

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.

TP adjustments. The adjustment so made are as under: a) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on power undertakings for an amount of Rs. 2,70,66,00,914/-. b) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Solid Waste Management System for an amount of Rs. 90,55,18,397/-. c) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Water Treatment

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.

TP adjustments. The adjustment so made are as under: a) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on power undertakings for an amount of Rs. 2,70,66,00,914/-. b) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Solid Waste Management System for an amount of Rs. 90,55,18,397/-. c) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Water Treatment

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

TP adjustments. The\nadjustment so made are as under:\na) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on power undertakings for an\namount of Rs. 2,70,66,00,914/-.\nb) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Solid Waste Management\nSystem for an amount of Rs. 90,55,18,397/-.\nc) Reduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Water Treatment

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

TP adjustments. The \nadjustment so made are as under:\na)\nReduction in claim u/s 80-IA on power undertakings for an \namount of Rs. 2,70,66,00,914/-.\nb)\nReduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Solid Waste Management \nSystem for an amount of Rs. 90,55,18,397/-.\nc)\nReduction in claim u/s 80-IA on Water Treatment

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

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

TP)A No.1558/Bang/2012 dated 19/9/2014. The Tribunal in para.6 to 8.3 of its order has considered this issue at length and has held as under: “6. Having heard both the parties and having considered the rival contentions as well as the material on record, we find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision

JCIT, RANG-2, KOTA vs. CHAMBAL FERTILISERS AND CHEMICALS LIMITED, KOTA

In the result, respective grounds of appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

TP)A No.1558/Bang/2012 dated 19/9/2014. The Tribunal in para.6 to 8.3 of its order has considered this issue at length and has held as under: “6. Having heard both the parties and having considered the rival contentions as well as the material on record, we find that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

method for determination of arm’s length price and has proposed an adjustment of Rs. 18,65,77,973/- determined as the value of interest receivable @ 14.88% (SBI PLR plus 300 basis points) on loans given to Associated Enterprises (AEs) during the year and which were outstanding at the year end. Subsequently, the matter was taken up by the assessee

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5, JAIPUR

In the result, the penalty is directed to be deleted and appeal of the assessee is allowed

method for determination of arm’s length price and has proposed an adjustment of Rs. 18,65,77,973/- determined as the value of interest receivable @ 14.88% (SBI PLR plus 300 basis points) on loans given to Associated Enterprises (AEs) during the year and which were outstanding at the year end. Subsequently, the matter was taken up by the assessee

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)

disallowed under section 37 which is offensive or prohibited by law. Interest on delay in deposit of TDS being compensatory in nature, and not penal in nature and hence not required to be disallowed under section 37(1) of the IT Act. 22.3 The ld. A/R in support of his view relied on the following decisions:- M/s. Resolve Salvage & Fire

MAYUR UNIQUOTERS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NFAC, NEW DELHI

Appeals of the assesse are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

method of accounting, nevertheless, the deduction of such liabilities, based only on book entries, would not be given. To pass muster, actual payments were a necessary pre-condition for allowing the expenditure. 15 ITANo.2&212/JPR/202 2 MayurUniquotersLtd. V, 53. The distinction between an employer’s contribution which is its primary liability under law – in terms of Section

SHREE CEMENT LIMITED,BEAWAR vs. PR.CIT, , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 04/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Shree Cement Limited, Cuke Pr.Cit, Vs. Bangur Nagar, Post Box No. 33, Udaipur. Beawar. Pan No.: Aaccs 8796 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Dilip Desai (Ca) Shri Vijay Shah (Ca) Shri Mohit Choudhary (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri B.K. Gupta (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 01/04/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 23/06/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pcit, Udaipur Dated 03.02.2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The Act) For The Assessment Year 2014-15. The Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax – Udaipur, (Here- In- After Referred To As Ld. Pr. Cit) Was Not Justified In Initiating Proceedings U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Since The Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (A.O.) Was Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of The Revenue.

method of valuation of the shares was submitted to the Assessing Officer during the proceedings, leading to the assessment order. It, therefore, appeared that the Assessing Officer after having asked a pertinent question of the method of valuing unlisted shares did not pursue that line of enquiry. Thus, this was a case of non-enquiry and not inadequate enquiry. Therefore