GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for

deem fit in the interest of justice. 4. We have heard the contention of the parties and perused the materials available on record. The prayer by the assessee for condonation of delay of 08 days is that the assessee has filed the appeal online which is within the time but they have received the email to file

GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

deem fit in the interest of justice. 4. We have heard the contention of the parties and perused the materials available on record. The prayer by the assessee for condonation of delay of 08 days is that the assessee has filed the appeal online which is within the time but they have received the email to file

VIJAY KUMAR VIJAYVERGIYA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-7, JAIPIUR

In the result ground no. 4 raised by the assessee is allowed

delay of 10 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds of appeal

MAYUR GLOBAL PRIVATE LIMITED ,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(3), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

deem fit in the interest of justice. 3.4 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The Bench Noted that the assessee for condonation of delay of 443 days has merit because of their business premises were under Bank possession and therefore, they were not in receipt of the communication and therefore, there

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

deems fit, in the interest of justice. Written submission 5. We have heard the contention of the parties and perused the materials available on record. The prayer by the assessee for condonation of delay of 37 days has merit, because the assessee fairly admitted that if calculated from noticing the email, the appeal was filed in time

KAILASH CHAND MEENA,ALWAR vs. ITO WARD2(3), ALWAR, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

condone the delay of 451 days in filing the appeal before us. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee e-filed his return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 13.06,2017 declaring income of Rs. 4,02,330/-. Later on revised return of income was filed on 21.06.2017 declaring income

MAGENDRA SINGH RATHORE,ALWAR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

condonation as the assessee is not going to achieve any benefit for the delay in fact the assessee is at risk. 4. The brief facts of the case in ITA No. 460/JPR/2024, as culled out from the records are that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act and/or survey action u/s 133A of the Act was carried

JAIPUR ENGINEERING COLLEGE JAIPUR RAJASTHAN SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

deem fit and proper in the case. 3.4 After hearing both the parties and perusing the materials available on record, the Bench noted that the reasons as substantiated by the ld. AR in his application for condonation of delay and in the affidavit of the assessee has merit which indicates the sufficient cause for such delay. Hence, in this view

INTEGRAL URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Us. In This Appeal, The Assessee Bank Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

deemed to be the income of the person who has assigned such source by creating a legal fiction. 33. Another shade of such controversy is where the income is not applied but diverted by an overriding title from the assessee, which he would otherwise have received. Such diverted income cannot be considered the income of the assessee at all. Reference

JITENDRA SADHWANI ,KOTA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is disposed of, for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

deemed fit and proper in the case. 2.3 We have heard both the parties and perused the materials available on record. In this case, the Bench noted that the ld. AR of the assessee himself accepted the delay of 10 days occurred in filing the appeal. The impugned order of ld. CIT(A) dated 26-02-2025 was served

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

deems fit, in the interest of justice. Written\nsubmission\n5. We have heard the contention of the parties and perused the\nmaterials available on record. The prayer by the assessee for\ncondonation of delay of 37 days has merit, because the assessee\nfairly admitted that if calculated from noticing the email, the appeal\nwas filed in time

WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

deems fit, in the interest of justice. Written\nsubmission\n5. We have heard the contention of the parties and perused the\nmaterials available on record. The prayer by the assessee for\ncondonation of delay of 37 days has merit, because the assessee\nfairly admitted that if calculated from noticing the email, the appeal\nwas filed in time

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

delay of 21 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue is condoned. 4. Since common issues involved, in all the appeals were heard together and disposed off by this common order. First, we take up Department’s appeal in ITA No. 275/JP/2022 for the A.Y. 2016-17. The Department has taken following grounds of appeal:- “(a) Whether

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

delay of 21 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue is condoned. 4. Since common issues involved, in all the appeals were heard together and disposed off by this common order. First, we take up Department’s appeal in ITA No. 275/JP/2022 for the A.Y. 2016-17. The Department has taken following grounds of appeal:- “(a) Whether

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

delay of 21 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue is condoned. 4. Since common issues involved, in all the appeals were heard together and disposed off by this common order. First, we take up Department’s appeal in ITA No. 275/JP/2022 for the A.Y. 2016-17. The Department has taken following grounds of appeal:- “(a) Whether

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

delay of 21 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue is condoned. 4. Since common issues involved, in all the appeals were heard together and disposed off by this common order. First, we take up Department’s appeal in ITA No. 275/JP/2022 for the A.Y. 2016-17. The Department has taken following grounds of appeal:- “(a) Whether

ACIT(EXEMP), CIRCLE, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue is dismissed

delay of 21 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue is condoned. 4. Since common issues involved, in all the appeals were heard together and disposed off by this common order. First, we take up Department’s appeal in ITA No. 275/JP/2022 for the A.Y. 2016-17. The Department has taken following grounds of appeal:- “(a) Whether

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR, ALWAR vs. ALWAR ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD., ALWAR

In the result, the Cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

delay. The same is condoned and appeal is admitted. Ground No. 1 "The Ld AO has erred on facts and in law in holding that the assessee has defaulted in non-deduction of TDS u/s 194C on payment made for purchase of packing material and disallowances was made ignoring the facts that some direct purchases were made without contract

DCIT, JAIPUR vs. RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Hearing.”

condone the aforesaid delay. The appeal is, thus, taken up for disposal on merits. 4.3 It is observed that while processing the return of income, the AO has levied minimum alternate tax (MAT) u/s 115JB of the Act amounting to Rs.2,47,61,511/- Aggrieved by this order, the appellant has preferred this appeal. The appellant has contended that

RAJASTHAN STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, the matter is set-aside to the file of the ld CIT(A) after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee corporation

delay is hereby condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication. ITA Nos. 885 & 886/JP/2018 Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, Jaipur Vs. DCIT, Jaipur 3. In ITA No. 885/JP/2018, the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal as under:- “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case Ld. DCIT Circle-05, Jaipur as well