MAGENDRA SINGH RATHORE,ALWAR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

property. Sh. Magendra Singh Rathore 5. Aggrieved by the above order of the Assessing Officer the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Apropos to the grounds so raised by the assessee, the relevant finding of the ld. CIT(A) is as under:- “In this case the search action took place on 02.08.2017. Appellant had filed his original

MAGENDRA SINGH RATHORE,ALWAR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

property.\n5. Aggrieved by the above order of the Assessing Officer the\nassessee preferred an appeal before the Id. CIT(A). Apropos to the\ngrounds so raised by the assessee, the relevant finding of the Id.\nCIT(A) is as under:-\n\"In this case the search action took place on 02.08.2017. Appellant had\nfiled his original return of income

OM KOTHARI FOUNDATION,JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN vs. ITO, (EXEMPTION) WARD-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), DR MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

section with effect the A.Y. 2009-10 and onwards. The learned assessing officer disallowed the benefit of exemption to the appellant in the assessment order on the ground that the appellant has violated the investment norms as provided under the four for the trust. It is an undisputed fact that the appellant is having investment in equity shares

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

va) r.w.s 2(24)(x) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n(iii) However, while finalizing the assessment on 15/04/2021, no such\ndisallowance is made by the FAO. In this regard, the recent judgement\nof Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Checkmate Services Pvt. Ltd\n[2022] 143 Taxman.com178 is important to be referred to and relied\nupon

M/S G.D. TAMBI & SONS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

house property. Ld. AO that of the ld. CIT(A) has not disputed the fact that the interest paid to partners was not in accordance with the law. As the ld. AO made the disallowance of claim of the assessee as per provision of section 57 of the Act it would be appropriate to deal with the provision

M/S G.D. TAMBI & SONS,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal for assessment year 2015-16 in

house property. Ld. AO that of the ld. CIT(A) has not disputed the fact that the interest paid to partners was not in accordance with the law. As the ld. AO made the disallowance of claim of the assessee as per provision of section 57 of the Act it would be appropriate to deal with the provision

PROFESSIONAL AUTOMOTIVES PRIVATE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील /ITA Nos.809 to 815/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष /Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2019-20 Professional Automotives Pvt. बनाम ACIT, Ltd. Bahu Plaza, Bahu Plaza, Jammu Vs. Central Circle- 1, and Kashmir Jaipur स्थायी लेखा सं./जी.आई.आर. सं./PAN/GIR No.:AAACP9608E अपीलार्थी/Appellant प्र]त्यर्थी/Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से / Assessee by :Shri Tarun Mittal, CA राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT (Th. V.C)

1), bei Vehicle rating of the gross vehicle weight and axel weight respectively as duly certified by the testing agencies for compliance of the rule 126, or in the maximum vehicle weight and maximum safe axle weight of each vehicle respectively as notified by the Central Government, or ill the maximum total load permitted to be carned by the tyre

RAJASTHAN STATE GANGANAGAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Him The Assessment Order Passed By Acit, Circle-6, Jaipur [ For Short Ao ] U/S 143

36(1)(va) is only prospective in nature and not retrospective i.e. not related to relevant Assessment Year 2017-18. 3. First, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue and the brief facts of the case as emerges from the orders of the lower authority are that in this case, the assessee company e-filed its return

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE GANGANAGAR SUGAR MILLS LIMITED, NEHRU SEHKAR BHAWAN, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Him The Assessment Order Passed By Acit, Circle-6, Jaipur [ For Short Ao ] U/S 143

36(1)(va) is only prospective in nature and not retrospective i.e. not related to relevant Assessment Year 2017-18. 3. First, we take up the appeal filed by the revenue and the brief facts of the case as emerges from the orders of the lower authority are that in this case, the assessee company e-filed its return

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

36(1)(va) for\ndelay in deposit of ESI/PF, however, has held that the assessment order dated\n12.04.2021 passed by Id. Assessing Officer is erroneous & prejudicial to the\ninterest of revenue qua (a) benefit of section 10AA is not available to the\nassessee appellant, (b) disallowance u/s. 14A ought to have been made, (c)\nsurrendered stock should be subjected

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)

Va Path Nirman (Bohra) & Co (No. 1) 258 ITR 431 has held that the past history of the assessee is best guiding factor. 2.4 In point no (iii) of para3at page 2 of order passed u/s 263 the ld PCIT assumed wrong facts by mentioning that the assessee has admitted that its case is covered by the provisions of section14A

BARODA RAJASTHAN KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK,AJMER vs. DY. CIT (ACIT) CIRCLE -2 AJMER , CR BUILDING,OPP. SESSION COURT,JAIPUR ROAD ,AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumarbaroda Rajasthan Kshetriya Gramin Bank, 2343 Rajasthan Patrika Building, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer – 305004 Pan No. Aaajb1164C ...... Appellant

36(1) (va). 5 That the appellant craves to add, amend and alter the grounds before or at the time of appellate hearing.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Regional Rural bank (RRB) involved in the business of giving loans and accepting deposits from its customers to earn the business income during

VIKAS DUGAR L/H OF LATE SHRI KESHARI SINGH DUGAR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: or in the course of hearing of the appeal.”

House, Toder Mal Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABXPD6164G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. & Shri Mukesh Soni. Adv., C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 03/06/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date

VIKAS DUGAR L/H OF LATE SHRI KESHARI SINGH DUGAR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

House, Toder Mal Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABXPD6164G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. & Shri Mukesh Soni. Adv., C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 03/06/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date

VIKAS DUGAR LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI KESHARI SINGH DUGAR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

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

House, Toder Mal Marg, Bani Park, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABXPD6164G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Prakul Khurana, Adv. & Shri Mukesh Soni. Adv., C.A. jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 03/06/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date