INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, UDAIPUR vs. DEPUTY CONSERVATOR OF FOREST (SOUTH), UDAIPUR

In the result, both the above appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) who has deleted the said demand by stating that the VFPMCs are not contractors under Section 194C, as they are formed under the Rajasthan Forest Act, 1953, and function as self-help groups for forest conservation and development. The payments made to VFPMCs are not contract payments but are reimbursements for work done under the joint forest management policy of the State Government.

section 194C thus do not apply. We get support of this view from the decision of Delhi Bench of ITAT in ITA No.6844/Del./2019 (Assessment Year : 2015-16) in the case of M/s. Santur Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT, Range 77 New Delhi where in the coordinate bench has also considered these aspect of the matter. The relevant part

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

36,500/- made on account of cash deposit during demonetization period." 5. The appellant craves leave or reserves right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal." Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 3.2 The grounds of the appeal taken by the revenue in appeal

SH. MOHD. JAVED BELIM,JODHPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 206C of the Act, against the sale of scrap. The revenue has treated as “assessee in I.T.A. Nos. 20 to 22/Jodh/2017 4 Assessment Years.: 2008-09 to 2010-11 default” and fixed the demand amount to Rs.13,36,475/- u/s 206C(6) and 206C(7) of the Act, for non-collecting of TCS u/s 206C. The assessment was completed

SH. MOHD. JAVED BELIM,JODHPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 206C of the Act, against the sale of scrap. The revenue has treated as “assessee in I.T.A. Nos. 20 to 22/Jodh/2017 4 Assessment Years.: 2008-09 to 2010-11 default” and fixed the demand amount to Rs.13,36,475/- u/s 206C(6) and 206C(7) of the Act, for non-collecting of TCS u/s 206C. The assessment was completed

SH. MOHD. JAVED BELIM,JODHPUR vs. ACIT (TDS), JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 206C of the Act, against the sale of scrap. The revenue has treated as “assessee in I.T.A. Nos. 20 to 22/Jodh/2017 4 Assessment Years.: 2008-09 to 2010-11 default” and fixed the demand amount to Rs.13,36,475/- u/s 206C(6) and 206C(7) of the Act, for non-collecting of TCS u/s 206C. The assessment was completed

ACIT, PAOTA C ROAD vs. VARAHA INFRA LIMITED, PAOTA B ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaithe Acit Vs M/S. Vardha Infra Ltd. Room No. 215, Aayakar Bhawan 6 Jalam Vilas Scheme Paota C Road, Jodhpur Paota B Road, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccv 7972 K

36,171/- and against this figure, amount of Rs. 2,46,73,49,728/- is declared in the P/L account. The reason for difference between the figure as appearing in Form 26AS and figure shown in P/L account is explained to be on account of advance payment on which no TDS was made and since this advance was not part

LAKHPAT TRADING AND INDUSTRYS PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blelakhpat Trading & Acit, Circle-3 Industryspvt. Ltd. Jodhpur G-72/73 79/80, 1St Phase, Boranada, Jodhpur - 342001 Pan No. Aaccl 5668 C Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, Ca (Physical) Smt. Runi Pal, Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac/ Cit(A)] Dated 26.06.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2017-18 Challenging Therein The Rejection Of Its Books Of Accounts U/S 145(3), Estimation Of Income & Reducing Genuine Sales.

36,79,809/- comes to Rs. 1,15,91,592/-. Thus, the addition on this account is restricted to Rs.1,15,91,592/- and the appellant gets a relief of Rs.3,34,818/-. This ground is therefore partly allowed. Grounds no.7-15 deal with the addition of Rs.1,11,60,612/- on account of sales made to M/s. Milap Enterprises

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIPUR vs. M/S. WAGAD CONSTRUTION COMPANY, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

36,82,80,178.43 319,863,553.74 198,793,676.98 9. As can be seen from the above tables, almost all sundry creditors were of earlier years, therefore, there is no justification to treat the same as unexplained credit entry of the year under consideration as per the ratio laid down in various judicial precedents. In the case

O.S. MOTORS PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR` vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME , JODHPUR

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

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmim/S. O.S. Motors Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Pr. Cit Sainiks Motor Building, Chopasani Jodhpur-1 Road, Jodhpur-342001 (Raj) Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaaco 1896 R

section 263 of the Act, merely because he has a different opinion in the matter. Possible view shall mean a issue, which is debatable and there could be more than one possible views. The consideration of the Commissioner as to whether an order is erroneous in so far it is prejudicial to the interests of Revenue must be based