SHRI SHIV SINGH CHOUHAN,RAJSAMAND vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2,, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri A. T. Varkeyshri Shiv Singh Chouhan Vs Assistant Commissioner Of C/O Rajendra Jain, Advocate, Income-Tax, Circle-2, 106, Akshay Deep Complex, Udaipur, Rajasthan 5Th B Road, Sardarpura, Jodhpur (Pan: Cifps9604M) (Appellant) (Respondent)

E R PER A. T. Varkey, J.M. This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Udaipur dated 30.11.2018 for AY 2010-11 confirming the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) imposed by the AO. 2. In this

SHRI THAKUR CHAPLOT,RAJSAMAND vs. ACIT CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri A. T. Varkeyshri Thakur Chaplot Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Pan: Aappc9323H Income-Tax, Circle-2, C/O Rajendra Jain, Advocate, Udaipur, Rajasthan, Kar 106, Akshay Deep Complex, Bhawan, Sub-City 5Th B Road,Sardrpura, Centre,Saveena,Udaipur Jodhpur (Raj)-313001. (Appellant) (Respondent)

E R PER A. T. Varkey, J.M. This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Udaipur dated 28.12.2018 for AY 2010-11 confirming the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) imposed by the AO. 2 Shri Thakur

SHRI SARAFRAJ AHMED ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri N.K.Saini & Shri A. T. Varkeyshri Sarfaraj Ahmed Vs Income-Tax Officer, Ward- Pan: Afypa8123R 1(4), Udaipur, Rajasthan- C/O Shrawan Kumar Gupta, 313001. Advocate, 416, Surya Chamber Radio Market, Nehru Bazar, Jaipur. (Appellant) (Respondent)

E R PER A. T. Varkey, J.M. This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Udaipur dated 20.09.2018 for AY 2010-11 confirming the penalty levied u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) imposed by the AO. 2 Shri Sarfaraj

PALI TEXTILE COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT,PALI vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

E) ] vide order dated 04.07.2016 w.e.f. 10.06.2016. The trust was constituted on 26.12.2015 and amended trust deed dated 10.06.2016. The main object of the trust is to carry on the work / activities by way of setting up of a special purpose vehicle(SPV) having complete operational autonomy for establishing, running and maintaining common Effluent Treatment Plant(s) [ CETPs), Effluent treatment

ACIT, CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), , JODHPUR vs. PALI TEXTILE COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT, PALI

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

E) ] vide order dated 04.07.2016 w.e.f. 10.06.2016. The trust was constituted on 26.12.2015 and amended trust deed dated 10.06.2016. The main object of the trust is to carry on the work / activities by way of setting up of a special purpose vehicle(SPV) having complete operational autonomy for establishing, running and maintaining common Effluent Treatment Plant(s) [ CETPs), Effluent treatment

MANOHAR SINGH,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(3),, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(b) and 271(1)(c) of the Act being premature at this stage, both the grounds are dismissed. 6. The ground No. 7 raised by the appellant is regarding charging of interest amounting to Rs. 24,49.836/- u/s 234B of the Act. This being consequential in nature, the AO is directed to allow relief

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

271(1)(C) 9.1 The initiation of penalty is not appealable. The ground of appeal is therefore dismissed as not maintainable. In the result appeal is partly allowed. (Vandana Verma) Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals-2) Udaipur ITA No. 10181/2018-19 Α.Υ. 2016-17 Date:22:07:2019 Copy to the 1. The Director General of Income Tax (Inv.), Rajasthan