DCIT, CC-3, JAIPUR vs. SMT. JYOTI FALOR, JAIPUR

transfer of equity share acquired or on after 1st day of October, 2004 shall be available only if the acquisition of share is chargeable to STT under Chapter VII of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004. So, now to claim the exemption u/s 10 (38), it is also mandatory that the transaction of acquisition of shares is carried through recognize stock

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR vs. SMT. SAROJ PARWAL, JAIPUR

transfer of equity share acquired or on after 1st day of October, 2004 shall be available only if the acquisition of share is chargeable to STT under Chapter VII of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004. So, now to claim the exemption u/s 10 (38), it is also mandatory that the transaction of acquisition of shares is carried through recognize stock

DCIT, C.C. -03, JAIPUR vs. SHRI TEJENDER KUMAR FALOR, JAIPUR

transfer of equity share acquired or on after 1st day of October, 2004 shall be available only if the acquisition of share is chargeable to STT under Chapter VII of the Finance (No.2) Act, 2004. So, now to claim the exemption u/s 10 (38), it is also mandatory that the transaction of acquisition of shares is carried through recognize stock

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and disposed off in light of aforesaid directions

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavvaibhav Global Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम Jaipur. Income Tax, Central Circle-4, Jaipur. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacv4679F

section 144C(13) of the Act was passed by the Assessing officer on 13.11.2019 wherein adjustment on account of transfer pricing as proposed by the Transfer Pricing Officer was made and the assessed income was determined at Rs.57,36,47,429/-. 3. Against the draft assessment order, the assessee filed its objections before the Dispute Resolution Panel and after considering

RAJASTHAN STATE TEXT BOOK BOARD,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

transferred to the reserve. For the purpose of Section 10(23C)(iiiab) of the Act the wholly or substantially financed by the Government has to be seen for each assessment year. From the details of the revenue received by the assessee for these two assessment years it is clear that more than 50% of the Revenue is received from

VAIBHAV GLOBAL LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CC-4, JAIPUR

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

38. Therefore, in the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and in light of aforesaid discussions and following the approach so suggested by OECD/UN transfer pricing guidelines and the decisions of the Hon' ble High Court and Coordinate Benches referred supra, the transfer pricing adjustment of Rs 29,25,17,385/- is hereby directed to be deleted

SHRI RUPAL JAIAN,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: The Date Of Appeal.

section 10(38) of the IT Act, 1961 as under :- Name of company Sale price Purchase price Transfer Exempt income

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.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

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.

Section 80IA(8), the word "OR" is missing in provisions of Section 80A(6) of the ACIT vs. Shree Cement Ltd. Act. It is noted that as per provisions of Section 80A(6), if any goods or services whether sold or acquired falls within the category specified domestic transactions of Section 92BA then in such case it is mandatory

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-3, JAIPUR vs. SHRI GAURAV BAGARIA, JAIPUR

10(38), read with section 147, of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Capital gains - Income arising from transfer of long-term securities (Bogus transactions) - Assessment year 200607 - Assessee purchased 3000 shares of company 'T through a stock broker - These shares were transferred to assessee's demat account - However, said stock broker submitted before authorities that 1w was providing accomodation entries

ALOK KUMAR JAIN ,PEARL PLEASURE vs. ACIT CIR-6, JAIPUR, NEW CERNTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, BHAGWAN DASS ROAD, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN,

Bench: Him.

price manipulation in the shares of YICL, the AO concludes the following in para 4.6.2 of the impugned order: Alok Kumar Jain vs. ACIT/DCIT Hence, in the light of above discussions, it is concluded that the assessee has traded in the penny scrip of the M/s Yamini Investment Company Limited "YICL" amounting to Rs. 4,77,46,835/- during

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)

transfer pricing regulations-HELD THAT:- Considering the binding effect of the decision rendered in TEXPORT OVERSEAS (P.) LTD. [2019 (12) TMI 1312 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] we respectfully follow the same and hold that the reference to the TPO in respect of specified domestic M/s. Worship Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. transactions mentioned in clause (i) of sec. 92BA is not valid

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)

transfer pricing regulations-HELD THAT:- Considering the binding effect of the decision rendered in TEXPORT OVERSEAS (P.) LTD. [2019 (12) TMI 1312 KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] we respectfully follow the same and hold that the reference to the TPO in respect of specified domestic M/s. Worship Infraprojects Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. transactions mentioned in clause (i) of sec. 92BA is not valid

KANTA AGARWAL ,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

section 10(38) of the IT Act, 1961 from bogus scrip transactions during the year as under :- Name of Sale price Purchase price Transfer

KANTA DEVI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(5), JAIPUR

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

section 10(38) of the IT Act, 1961 from bogus scrip transactions during the year as under :- Name of Sale price Purchase price Transfer

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)

section (6) to provide that, with effect from 1-4-2012, the provisions of sub-section shall cease to have effect. Accordingly, a SEZ developer or any entrepreneur carrying on business in an SEZ unit (being a company) would be liable to pay MAT on the profits arising from the development of SEZ or the business carried

BIRENDRA SINGH NIRBHAY,SIRSI ROAD JAIPUR RAJASTHAN vs. ITO WARD 3(1) JAIPUR, NCRB INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT STATUE CIRCLE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 10(38) :-\n\"Long-term capital gain arising on transfer of equity share or units of equity\noriented mutual fund or units of business trust is not chargeable to tax in the\nhands of any person, if following conditions are satisfied:\nThe transaction i.e. the transaction of sale of equity shares or units of an equity\noriented mutual fund

HARISH SHARMA HUF,B-1, PATODIYA MARG, SHASTRI NAGAR, JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-5(3), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

transferred to the beneficiary at a very nominal price mostly off-line through preferential allotment or off line sale to save STT The beneficiary (an Individual) holds the share for one year, the statutory period after which LTCG is exempt under section 10(38