THE BANK OF RAJASTHAN EMPLOYEES CREDIT & THIRFT COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the results appeal of the assessee in ITA No

140,\nwherein it was held that Section 80P(2) (d) deduction is not eligible to co-operative\nsocieties on interest income earned from investments with another co-operative bank/\nnationalised bank. The relevant observations are as follows:-\n\"23. Thus, the aforesaid judgments supports the view taken by this Court that character\nof income depends upon the nature of activity

LATE SH. BIRDI CHAND THROUGH LEGAL HEIR MUKESH SHARMA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-7(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

house.” 6. To support the arguments so raised the ld. AR of the assessee and has relied upon the following evidences in support of the contentions so raised:- 10 Late Sh. Birdi Chand vs. ITO S. No. Particulars Pg. No. 1. Copy of submission filed before Ld. CIT(A) 1-4 2. Copy of Index of paper book filed before

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

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

140 ] he took a view that the interest earned by the assessee to the extent of Rs. 8,94,996/- was not in accordance with the provision of section 80P of the Act and thereby the claim to that extent was disallowed. When the matter taken up before the ld. CIT(A) he has given the relief

BHIWADI INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,BHIWADI, ALWAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

property held under trust wholly for charitable or religious purposes and the provisions of that section and Section 13 shall apply accordingly. 12. Section 13, a non obstante clause provides that the provisions of Section 11 or Section 12 shall not operate as to exclude from total income of the previous years of the person in respect of various income

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

House vs. ITO (1995) 53TTJ (Coch-Trib) 293, it is held that there is a material difference on the question of onus between section 68 and section 69. If the case falls u/s 68 of the Act, the onus is on the assessee to adduce evidence that the credits in the accounts are genuine. In a case under section

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS MINERALS PRIVATE LIMITED, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

House vs. ITO (1995) 53TTJ (Coch-Trib) 293, it is held that there is a material difference on the question of onus between section 68 and section 69. If the case falls u/s 68 of the Act, the onus is on the assessee to adduce evidence that the credits in the accounts are genuine. In a case under section

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA vs. BANAS BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS LLP, JHALAWAR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

House vs. ITO (1995) 53TTJ (Coch-Trib) 293, it is held that there is a material difference on the question of onus between section 68 and section 69. If the case falls u/s 68 of the Act, the onus is on the assessee to adduce evidence that the credits in the accounts are genuine. In a case under section

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

140 ] he took a view that the interest earned by the\nassessee to the extent of Rs.8,94,996/- was not in accordance with the\nprovision of section 80P of the Act and thereby the claim to that extent was\ndisallowed.\nWhen the matter taken up before the Id. CIT(A) he has given the relief of\nRs.72,373/- considering

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

140 ] he took a view that the interest earned by the\nassessee to the extent of Rs.8,94,996/- was not in accordance with the\nprovision of section 80P of the Act and thereby the claim to that extent was\ndisallowed.\nWhen the matter taken up before the Id. CIT(A) he has given the relief of\nRs.72,373/- considering

INCOME TAX OFFICER , SIKAR vs. BHASKAR CHAUHAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: Him.

property being land or building or both, shares and securities, loans and advances, deposits in bank account. (2) If any proceeding initiated or any order of assessment or reassessment made under sub-section (1) has been annulled in appeal or any other legal proceeding, then, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or section 153, the assessment or reassessment relating

AJAY BAKLIWAL,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA, KOTA

property held under (Audit objection)\n Assessment year 2016-17 Assessment of assessee-trust was completed under section\n143(3) at 'Nil' income - Revenue audit party, however, objected to finalization of retum of\nassessee-trust at 'Nil' for reason that during year, assessee received corpus donations\nwhich were not included in income for application under section 11 On basis

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN,KOTA vs. ITO WD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

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

house property and other sources A reopening notice\nwas issued upon assessee for reason that an information was received through insight\nportal that assessee despite having a salary of certain taxable amount and having\npurchased securities of certain amount had not filed his return of income – It was noted\nthat notice under section 148A(b) did not call upon assessee

SH. MADAN LAL GUPTA,KESHAV NAGAR, ALWAR vs. ADDL. CIT, CENTRAL RANGE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

House Property Income and income from Other Sources. 3.2 The proceedings of assessment of income were initiated by issuing of notices u/s 143(2) of the Act on 09.08.2019 & 142(1) of the Act on 09-09-2019 and served online on the e-mail of the assessee. Notice u/s 142(1) dated 09-09-2019 was issued

SH. MADAN LAL GUPTA,KESHAV NAGAR, ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

House Property Income and income from Other Sources. 3.2 The proceedings of assessment of income were initiated by issuing of notices u/s 143(2) of the Act on 09.08.2019 & 142(1) of the Act on 09-09-2019 and served online on the e-mail of the assessee. Notice u/s 142(1) dated 09-09-2019 was issued

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. KAMLAPRABHA L/H OF LATE SHRI GOPAL LAL JI GOSWAMI, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and the Cross objection of the assessee is disposed off in terms of the observation made herein above

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

property documents regarding purchase of properties were seized, as specifically noted by the AO himself in the satisfaction note recorded u/s 153C of the Act. There apart, at various places including the finding recorded in the assessment order for AY 2012-13, the fact of seizure of possession letter is mentioned. The Respondent AO simply mentioned that what was shared

BALVEER SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(3) JAIPUR, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

Housing Construction Ltd. v. Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant\nCommissioner of Incometax/Income-tax Officer, National e-Assessment\nCentre, Delhi.\n\"Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 Income escaping assessment\nGeneral (Speaking order) Assessment year 2013-14-Assessee-company\npurchased a land for consideration of certain amount and had filed return of\nincome as NIL Assessment in case of assessee was completed Subsequently,\nAssessing

HARIRAM HOSPITAL,ALWAR vs. PCIT, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1535/JPR/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Hariram Hospital Bye Pass Road Hariram Hospital Bhiwadi, Alwar – 310 019 (Raj) बनाम Vs. The Pr.CIT (Central) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAFFH 5746 M अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Himanshu Goyal, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Da

Properties Versus TheDcit, Central Circle-1, Mumbai, 2014 (12) TMI 800 Assessee has explained a reasonable cause for not filing the appeal within the period of limitation as there was an inadvertent mistake at the office of the Chartered Accountant - by not filing the appeal within the period of limitation, the assessee cannot have any ulterior purpose - No prudent person

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

Housing Board and the Authority will be made by the State Government effective from the date to be fixed by it; k. to acquire, hold, manage and dispose of property, movable or immovable, as it may deem necessary; l. to enter into contracts, agreements or arrangements with any person or organization as the Authority may deem necessary for performing