NAHAR COLOURS AND COATINHGS PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OFINCOMETAX, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowance of expenditure under Section14AtobeRs. 183.63/acs. 1. It is accepted and admitted that the Assessing Officer had not applied Section 14A and no deduction under the said Section was made. In respect of the present assessment year, i.e., Assessment Year 2000-01, the contention of the respondent- assessee is that in view of the proviso to Section

U AND T TRACTOR SPARES PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the respective assessees are allowed

disallowed under section 43B read with section 36(1)(va) of the Act in view of the binding decisions of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court. 19. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. ITA No. 28 & 29/JODH/2021 ITA No. 05, 28, 29 & 43/JODH/2021 11 Mohangarh Engineers and Construction Co. & Others vs. CPC 20. Heard

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

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

154 without providing any opportunity of hearing by the Assessing Officer. 2. Ld. CIT(A) also erred in law in arbitrarily confirming the Ld. AO's action in not rectifying the mistake as adjustments were made beyond the A.O. jurisdiction/ powers provided under clause (i) to (vi) of section 143(1)(a). 3. Ld. CIT(A) erred

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

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

154 without providing any opportunity of hearing by the Assessing Officer. 2. Ld. CIT(A) also erred in law in arbitrarily confirming the Ld. AO's action in not rectifying the mistake as adjustments were made beyond the A.O. jurisdiction/ powers provided under clause (i) to (vi) of section 143(1)(a). 3. Ld. CIT(A) erred

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ACIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

154 taxmann.com 305 (SC) has observed as under: “15.13. Further, under the provisions of the State Act, 1984, 'agricultural and rural development bank' means the Kera/a Cooperative Central Land Mortgage Bank Limited, registered under Section 10 of the Travancore- Cochin Co-operative Societies Act, 1951, which shall be known as Kera/a State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ACIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

154 taxmann.com 305 (SC) has observed as under: “15.13. Further, under the provisions of the State Act, 1984, 'agricultural and rural development bank' means the Kera/a Cooperative Central Land Mortgage Bank Limited, registered under Section 10 of the Travancore- Cochin Co-operative Societies Act, 1951, which shall be known as Kera/a State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited

ACIT, CIRCLE, PALI. vs. M/S. RAJASTHAN MARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK, , JODHPUR

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

154 taxmann.com 305 (SC) has observed as under: “15.13. Further, under the provisions of the State Act, 1984, 'agricultural and rural development bank' means the Kera/a Cooperative Central Land Mortgage Bank Limited, registered under Section 10 of the Travancore- Cochin Co-operative Societies Act, 1951, which shall be known as Kera/a State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ACIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

154 taxmann.com 305 (SC) has observed as under: “15.13. Further, under the provisions of the State Act, 1984, 'agricultural and rural development bank' means the Kera/a Cooperative Central Land Mortgage Bank Limited, registered under Section 10 of the Travancore- Cochin Co-operative Societies Act, 1951, which shall be known as Kera/a State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ADDITIONAL CIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

154 taxmann.com 305 (SC) has observed as under: “15.13. Further, under the provisions of the State Act, 1984, 'agricultural and rural development bank' means the Kera/a Cooperative Central Land Mortgage Bank Limited, registered under Section 10 of the Travancore- Cochin Co-operative Societies Act, 1951, which shall be known as Kera/a State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited

M.G.B. GRAMIN BANK (THROUGH SUCCESSOR RAJASTHANMARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK),JODHPUR vs. ADDITIONAL CIT, PALI

Appeals are disposed off in the terms indicated as above

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

154 taxmann.com 305 (SC) has observed as under: “15.13. Further, under the provisions of the State Act, 1984, 'agricultural and rural development bank' means the Kera/a Cooperative Central Land Mortgage Bank Limited, registered under Section 10 of the Travancore- Cochin Co-operative Societies Act, 1951, which shall be known as Kera/a State Co-operative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank Limited

SUNIL PAGARIA,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowed to the extent, vide rectification u/s 154. (3) Alternatively: how assessment completed u/s 143 (3), proceeding u/s 154 is not amenable? Copy of reply dated 04/05/2018 attached at Pg No 54 to 97. Yet the Ld. AO did not consider without considering case laws furnished. In first appeal, it has been argued on similar line like:  Provision of section

KAUSHALIYA DEVI DHOOT,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

disallowance of brought forward capital loss of Rs. 13,01,585/- and TDS Credit of Rs. 46,662/- in the computation of income. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused material on record. From the impugned order, it is seen that the learned JCIT (A) rejected the appeal qua the assessee by observing vide para5, as under

UMED HOSPITAL MEDICARE RELIEF SOCIETY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CPC /ITO, EXEMPTION WARDM,, BANGALORE. JODHPUR

154 of the Act before ITO, Exemption, Jodhpur seeking to rectify the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act along with Form 10 and resolution passed requesting to accept the Form 10, which is pending adjudication till date. [PB Page No. 40] 6] That Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 26.10.2022 had disallowed the claim of exemption

SUNIL KUMAR DOSHI,BARMER vs. DCIT, CPC / ITO, WARD-1,, BANGALORE / BARMER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Making Assessment, Which Is Beyond Jurisdiction Of The Present Proceedings. 2. A. The Ld. Ao Has Erred In Not Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 62,641/- Made By The Ld. Ao In 143(1) Order On Account Of Depreciation Claimed. B. The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Not Following The Decision Of Hon’Ble

section 143(1) / 154 and on facts also the same is outside the scope of such adjustment. 1.2. It is well settled that no addition can be made in a order u/s 143(1) / 154 where detailed reasoning is required for making any addition. The disallowance

SUSHIL KUMAR MARLECHA,PALI vs. DEPUTY/ASSTT, CIT (CPC-TDS) / ITO, TDS-1,, GHAZIABAD / JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

section should be construed strictly and reasonably. The Bombay High Court in the case of Dattatraya Gopal Shette vs. CIT (1984) 41 CTR (Bom) 393 : (1984) 150 ITR 460 (Bom), has also taken the same view. The Bombay High Court was dealing with a case where an application for renewal of registration was not signed by one of the partners

OCHHAB LAL JAIN,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

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

154 and 147 of the Act. In the category stated in (a), obviously if an income escapes an assessment, the provisions Section 147 of the Act can be invoked, subject to the condition stated in the proviso of the section. In the category of cases falling in category (b), section 251(1)(a) provides the CIT(A) could enhance such

SHRI KAILASH CHANDRA,BARMER vs. ITO,WARD-1, BARMER

In the result, appeal of the assesse is allowed

disallowance of deduction u/s 40(a)(ia) is outside the jurisdiction of Section 154 of the Act. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the order passed by the Ld CIT(A) grossly erred in upholding the addition of Rs. 1

M/S. KARNAWAT INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITO, RAJSAMAND

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

1. Under the facts & circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order of Ld. ITO rejecting the application of the assessee under Section 154 r.w.s. 155 (11A) of the Act. 2. Appellant craves leave to add / alter any grounds of appeal before the disposal of appeal.” Submission