ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR vs. SHRI BABU LAL DATA, 2015-16

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

68,00,000/-without appreciating the fact that the assessee has not maintained any books of accounts and also failed to provide name, PAN, address of the persons with whom the loans were said to be taken." 4. "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made

SHRI BABU LAL DATA,ALWAR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

68,00,000/-without appreciating the fact that the assessee has not maintained any books of accounts and also failed to provide name, PAN, address of the persons with whom the loans were said to be taken." 4. "On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition made

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

68,281/- when it cannot be ascertained as to when the assessee obtained these PAN nos. from the transporters?” The Assessing Officer made total disallowance of Rs. 1,62,33,061/- by invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act because the assessee has not deducted TDS in respect of these payments made to various transporters

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

68,281/- when it cannot be ascertained as to when the assessee obtained these PAN nos. from the transporters?” The Assessing Officer made total disallowance of Rs. 1,62,33,061/- by invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act because the assessee has not deducted TDS in respect of these payments made to various transporters

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

68,281/- when it cannot be ascertained as to when the assessee obtained these PAN nos. from the transporters?” The Assessing Officer made total disallowance of Rs. 1,62,33,061/- by invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act because the assessee has not deducted TDS in respect of these payments made to various transporters

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

68,281/- when it cannot be ascertained as to when the assessee obtained these PAN nos. from the transporters?” The Assessing Officer made total disallowance of Rs. 1,62,33,061/- by invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act because the assessee has not deducted TDS in respect of these payments made to various transporters

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR vs. M/S GANPATI EXCLUSIVE DESIGNER SAREES PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 145(3) of Act. The following additions are made by the AO. S. No. Particulars Amount 1. Trading addition of Rs. 7,68,940/- by applying 7,68,940.00 the G.P. rate of 8.60% as against the declared G.P rate of 8.52% declared by assessee 2. On account of late deposit of employee 33,914.00 contribution of Provident

M/S GANPATI EXCLUSIVE DESIGNER SAREES PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 145(3) of Act. The following additions are made by the AO. S. No. Particulars Amount 1. Trading addition of Rs. 7,68,940/- by applying 7,68,940.00 the G.P. rate of 8.60% as against the declared G.P rate of 8.52% declared by assessee 2. On account of late deposit of employee 33,914.00 contribution of Provident

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)

7) TMI 790-ITAT KOLKATA (Case law Paper Book page 71-81) TP Adjustment - ALP determination qua domestic transactions entered into by the assessee with its partner u/s 92BA(i) of the Act-TP Adjustment of transactions falling u/s 40A(2)(b) - HELD THAT: We find that though all these arguments have been duly considered by the ITAT

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)

7) TMI 790-ITAT KOLKATA (Case law Paper Book page 71-81) TP Adjustment - ALP determination qua domestic transactions entered into by the assessee with its partner u/s 92BA(i) of the Act-TP Adjustment of transactions falling u/s 40A(2)(b) - HELD THAT: We find that though all these arguments have been duly considered by the ITAT

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(2), JAIPUR, NCR BUILDING, STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR vs. VASUDEV HEMRAJANI, ARJUN NAGAR, JAIPUR

The appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

7. This order has been passed under Section 250 read with Section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 5. As the revenue was not satisfied with the finding so recorded by the ld. CIT(A) while deciding the appeal of the assessee, revenue has preferred the present appeal challenging the finding

RUKMANI JEWELLERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIR.-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)

40A(3) of the Act applies to buyer and not the seller. There being no restriction under the Act to accept cash against sales, the assessee Company cannot be penalized. (g) Hon'ble supreme court in the case of CIT v. P. Mohan Kala 291 ITR 278 (SC) has clearly explain that the primary condition for invocation of section

SUBHASH PARETA,KOTA vs. ACIT, KOTA

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

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 are that

BALAJI JEWELLERS ,JAIPUR vs. ACIT CC -4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

40A(3) of the Act applies to buyer and not the seller. There being no restriction under the Act to accept cash against sales, the assessee Company cannot be penalized. (h) Hon'ble supreme court in the case of CIT v. P. Mohan Kala 291 ITR 278 (SC) has clearly explain that the primary condition for invocation of section

AMAN EXPORTS INTERNATIONAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

68 of the Act for the year under consideration. The ld. AO also noted that the 5 Aman Exports International vs. DCIT assessee made the payment in violation of section 40A(3) of the Act for an amount of Rs. 1,01,505/- which as also added as income of the assessee. 5. Aggrieved from the order

M/S. GURU KRIPA CAREER INSTITUTE PVT. LTD.,SIKAR vs. PR.CIT-3, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 40A(3) on account of prize distribution expenses on 04.10.2014 amounting to Rs.1,10,000/- and Rs.1,53,000/- and celebration & festival expenses on 21.10.2014 amounting to Rs.37,500/- and 34,000/- have been allowed. 6. Depreciation on furniture and computers was allowed as claimed in the return of income without verification. 7. Vehicle running expenses allowed

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. JADAU JEWELLERS & MFG (P) LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed and that of the Revenue are dismissed

68 of the Act. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Smt.Santosh Jain, 296 ITR 324 held that Section 40A(3) cannot be invoked when the income is estimated by applying the gross profit rate. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court followed the decision of The Hon'ble Allahabad High Court

MOTHERS EDUCATION HUB,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

68 of the Act and thereby enhancing the addition to 2 Mothers Education Hub, Jaipur. Rs. 53,62,500/- as against Rs. 5 lacs made by the AO. It has further erred in taxing this amount u/s 115BBE @ 60% instead of taxing the same @ 30% by ignoring that section 115BBE substituted by Taxation Laws (Second Amendment Act), 2016 which