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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

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

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

67,100/- to be disallowed in F.Y. 2017-18 relevant to A.Y. 2018-19 out of the non-verifiable cash payments related to anaesthesia, Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT and further, as the verifiability of these expenses could not be ascertained by the AO since the appellant failed to get verified the cash payments related to anaesthesia amounting

THE LAKE PALACE HOTELS & MOTELSPRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. PCIT,CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 14A is not applicable. It is also relevant and pertinent to point out that the assesse that he internal resources accretion out of the operating profit of the assesse as at the beginning of the financial year, as brought forward from the immediately preceding year, were, by itself, more than adequate and sufficient to have provided for the investments

SH. MAHENDRA SINGH,FLAT NO.303, ASHAPURA TOWER, PAOTA, JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaishri Mahendra Singh Vs Theacit Flat No. 303, Ashapura Tower Circle-3 Paota, Jodhpur Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Csdps 5573B

section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. I do not find any reason whatsoever in nature to interfere with the observation and findings of the Ld. Assessing Officer in regard to the disallowance of Interest expenditure u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act of Rs. 1,18,90,400/-.No interference in AO's Order is called for. The addition

M/S. DEEPAK & COMPANY INFRA PVT. LTD. ,SRI GANGANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANAGNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

67,58,558/-, gross profit of Rs.62,15,997/- was shown and after claiming deduction of Rs.35,92,846/- u/s 80IA, the assessee has shown taxable income of Rs.26,23,150/-. 11. It was submitted that as per provisions of Section 80IA(6) of the Act and Rule 18BBE of the Income-tax Rules, deduction is available on the profit

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

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

67 such notes in the aggregate, out ofwhich 61 such notes could be encashed by the appellants on 18th January, 1946, through the Eastern Bank. A mere calculation of the nature indulged in by the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the appellants, supported

DCIT, CIRCLE, PALI vs. SHRI BRIJ BHUSHAN GOYAL, FARIDABAD.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripotedcit Vs. Shri Brij Bhushan Circle, Pali., Goyal, Jodhpur. House No. 331, Sector Rajasthan. 16A, Faridabad, Haryana.-121002 Pan/Gir No. : Aawpg8405D Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Amit Kothari, Ca. Ar Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit -Dr Date Of Hearing 10.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 14.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Revenue Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – I, Jodhpur Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

67,81,949 2 Income from other sources 64,33,672 3 Addition on account of depreciation 35,151 claim 4 Addition on account of electricity 1,01,574 expenses 5 Gross Total income 2,33,52,346 6 Deduction u/s 80C 1,00,000 7 Deduction u/s 80TTA 1,000 8 Deduction u/s 80D 10,693 9 Total

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR vs. M/S. ADARSH CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. , SIROHI.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

67(1) (10× cap) read with proviso: deposits/loans vis-à-vis subscribed capital & reserves; (ii) Section 33 (20% shareholding cap): more than 20% held by Adarsh Credit Co- operative Society Ltd.; (iii) Section 35 (redemption): redemption limited to specified authorities; (iv) Sections 7(1)(d), 10(1), 11(7)(a): bye-laws to be consistent with the Act— found otherwise

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR vs. M/S. ADARSH CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. , SIROHI.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, as indicated above

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

67(1) (10× cap) read with proviso: deposits/loans vis-à-vis subscribed capital & reserves; (ii) Section 33 (20% shareholding cap): more than 20% held by Adarsh Credit Co- operative Society Ltd.; (iii) Section 35 (redemption): redemption limited to specified authorities; (iv) Sections 7(1)(d), 10(1), 11(7)(a): bye-laws to be consistent with the Act— found otherwise

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

67 such notes in the aggregate, out ofwhich 61 such notes could be encashed by the appellants on 18th January, 1946, through the Eastern Bank. A mere calculation of the nature indulged in by the Income-tax Officer or the Appellate Assistant Commissioner was not enough, without any further scrutiny, to dislodge the position taken up by the appellants, supported

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BARMER vs. PUSHP RAJ BOHRA, JALORE

The appeal of the revenue is allowed, in the manner discussed as above

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Bleito, Ward-1, Barmer. Vs. Pushp Raj Bohra, M-09, Shivaji Nagar, Jalore - 343001. Pan No. Aanpb4456C Assessee By Shri Goutam Chand Baid, C.A. Revenue By Smt. Runi Pal, Cit (D.R.) Date Of Hearing 29.04.2025. Date Of Pronouncement 01.03.2025. Order Per Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Id. National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac/Cit(A)], Delhi Dated 08.02.2024 In Respect Of Assessment Year: 2017-18 Where The Department Has Raised Following Grounds: 1. Whether The Id. Cit(A) Is Justified In Facts & Law In Directing To Treat The Income From The Sale Of Immovable Properties As Capital Gains Instead Of Business Income, By Ignoring The Fact That Assesse & His Business Concerns Are Engaged In The Business Of Property & Real Estate Development & Huge Expenses Of Rs. 8.72 Cr. Were Incurred By Assessee On Development Of Projects To Earn Profit. 2. Whether The Id. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & Facts By Directing The Ao To Treat The Income From The Sale Of Immovable Properties As Income From Capital Gains Instead Of Business Income By Merely Following The Order Of Hon'Ble

Section) New Delhi." 2. The sole issue challenged by the revenue is that the CIT (A)/NFAC was not justified in treatment of the income from the sale of immovable properties as capital gains instead of business income and directing the AO to examine the eligibility of exemption u/s 54F/54EC before giving the order appeal effect. 3. Briefly the fact