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

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

42 ITD 62, that the Audit Report can even be filed at the time of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). Swajan Pariwar Trust vs.ADIT(E) A similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble (1997) 57 TTJ (Mum) (SMC) 77, Mumbai Bench of Tribunal that where the trust filed the audit report along with a rectification application under section

SHRI SEWARAM CHARITABLE TRUST ,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD, EXEMPTION, UDAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

disallowing exemption claimed under section 11 which resulted in a demand to be payable by the taxpayer amount of Rs. 13489828. During the course of appellate proceedings, the appellant has submitted that appellant is registered u/s. 12A and 80G by the Commissioner as it is engaged in imparting education and running various education institutions. The appellant had not filed return

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

B. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur 342003 (Raj.) [PAN: AABAM 0917E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR & Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 ORDER Per Bench: This bunch of appeals and cross objection has been filed by the Revenue and assessee against the separate

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

B. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur 342003 (Raj.) [PAN: AABAM 0917E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR & Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 ORDER Per Bench: This bunch of appeals and cross objection has been filed by the Revenue and assessee against the separate

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

B. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur 342003 (Raj.) [PAN: AABAM 0917E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR & Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 ORDER Per Bench: This bunch of appeals and cross objection has been filed by the Revenue and assessee against the separate

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

B. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur 342003 (Raj.) [PAN: AABAM 0917E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR & Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 ORDER Per Bench: This bunch of appeals and cross objection has been filed by the Revenue and assessee against the separate

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

B. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur 342003 (Raj.) [PAN: AABAM 0917E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR & Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 ORDER Per Bench: This bunch of appeals and cross objection has been filed by the Revenue and assessee against the separate

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

B. Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur 342003 (Raj.) [PAN: AABAM 0917E] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Respondent by : Sh. Lovish Kumar, CIT-DR & Sh. S. M. Joshi, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 19.10.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 10.11.2023 ORDER Per Bench: This bunch of appeals and cross objection has been filed by the Revenue and assessee against the separate

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

AJMER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,AJMER vs. CIT(EXEMPTION)/ ITO (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR / JODHPUR

In the result, the stay application filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Borad

disallow the claimed capital expenditure of Rs.5,25,52,586/-. Since, the assessee was hit by provision of section 2(15) of the I.T. Act, 1961 the total taxable income comes to Rs.6,71,88,566/- (Rs.1,46,35,981/- + Rs.5,25,52,586/-), therefore, the assessment done at NIL income by the AO is erroneous as the final computation

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

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed

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

b) referred to in sub-section (1A) of Section 192, being an employer, does not deduct, or does not pay, or after so deducting fails to pay, the whole or any part of the tar, as required by or under this Act, then, such person, shall without prejudice to any other consequences which he may incur, be deemed