SHRI SHANIDEV CHARITABLE TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeals are hereby dismissed being barred by limitation

Bench: Learned Cit(E), Jaipur By Way Of Two Application I.E. One U/S 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act ( In Short “The Act”) To Seek Its Registration. Shri Shanidev Charitable Trust, Ajmer. Another Application Were Also Presented By The Applicant Before Learned Cit(E) Seeking Approval U/S 80G Of The Act.

Exemption), Jaipur. Rawat Nagar Bhati Ki Dang foy Sagar Vs. Road, Ajmer. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkjla-@PAN/GIR No. ABBTS4485K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Shri Rajesh Ojha, CIT lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 23/12/2025 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 23/12/2025 vkns

RAM DEV DAIYA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD-1, JHUNJHUNU

Bench: The Tribunal. Learned Counsel For The Assessee Referred To The Contents Of The Application While Orally Making Out A Case Of There Being

delay in filing of the present appeal of 476 days is therefore condoned. 21. Taking up now the appeal of the assessee, the grounds raised by the assessee read as under:- “Leave Encashment Fully Exempted

VIVEK SHIKSHA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION - 1,, JAIPUR

In the result ground no. 2 raised by the assessee stands

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1134 & 1135/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Vivek Shiksha Samiti Jobner Road, Kalwar, VIA Jhotwara, Jaipur. cuke Vs. The ITO, Exemption-1, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTV0361Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary

Exemption-1, Jaipur. VIA Jhotwara, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTV0361Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary (JCIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 09/10/2024 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement : 18/10/2024

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

condonation the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). D. Rebuttal and factual clarification on the Arguments of the Ld. DR taken during hearing and submission on merits of the case 18. The Ld. DR during the hearing has alleged misrepresentation of the facts by the Appellant, which is specifically denied. The Ld. DR has rather misinterpreted

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

condonation the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). D. Rebuttal and factual clarification on the Arguments of the Ld. DR taken during hearing and submission on merits of the case 18. The Ld. DR during the hearing has alleged misrepresentation of the facts by the Appellant, which is specifically denied. The Ld. DR has rather misinterpreted

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

condonation the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). D. Rebuttal and factual clarification on the Arguments of the Ld. DR taken during hearing and submission on merits of the case 18. The Ld. DR during the hearing has alleged misrepresentation of the facts by the Appellant, which is specifically denied. The Ld. DR has rather misinterpreted

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

condonation the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). D. Rebuttal and factual clarification on the Arguments of the Ld. DR taken during hearing and submission on merits of the case 18. The Ld. DR during the hearing has alleged misrepresentation of the facts by the Appellant, which is specifically denied. The Ld. DR has rather misinterpreted

DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), JAIPUR

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

condonation of delay, reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. (1979) 118 ITR 326 (SC) (ii) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). (iii) M/s Hossana Ministries Vs. ITO(Exemptions

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU SHEKSHANIK AND SAMAJIK SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR

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

Exemption 2. At the outset of the hearing the bench noted that there is a delay in filing the present appeal by 23 days. In support of that delay the ld. AR of the contended as under: Sub: Application seeking Condonation

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

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

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

EXEMPTION), WARD -1, JAIPUR 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very

RAJASTHAN STATE BHARAT SCOUT AND GUIDE,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX HOLDING CHARGE OF ITO EXEMPTIONS, JAIPUR

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

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

EXEMPTION), WARD -1, JAIPUR 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very

DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes only

condonation of delay, reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. (1979) 118 ITR 326 (SC) (ii) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). (iii) M/s Hossana Ministries Vs. ITO(Exemptions

DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes only

condonation of delay, reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. (1979) 118 ITR 326 (SC) (ii) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). (iii) M/s Hossana Ministries Vs. ITO(Exemptions

ISHAN ARORA,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

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

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

delay is therefore covered under "sufficient cause" as recognized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various High Courts. Denial of condonation would result in grave injustice, as the appellant would be deprived of the statutory right to appeal without any fault on their part. 2. That the Ld. AO erred in making an addition

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

condonation the delay in filing the appeal before the Ld.\nCIT(A).\nD. Rebuttal and factual clarification on the Arguments of the Ld. DR taken\nduring hearing and submission on merits of the case\n18. The Ld. DR during the hearing has alleged misrepresentation of the facts\nby the Appellant, which is specifically denied. The Ld. DR has rather\nmisinterpreted

PAPPU JAISWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condoning the delay. The individual grounds of appeal are discussed here under- Grounds of Appeal 1. That In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee simply on the ground of alleged non compliance of opportunity granted by him whereas the appeal required

BANK OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. ITO TDS-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: Or At The Time Of Appellate Hearing.”

delay before ld. CIT(A) is also condoned considering the explanation furnished by the assessee in all these bunch of appeals. 12. In ITA No. 639/JP/2024, the appeal of the assessee has not been considered on merits and the same was dismissed confirming the view of the ld. AO as the appeal was filed before ld. CIT(A) belatedly

BANK OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. ADDL.CIT(TDS), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: Or At The Time Of Appellate Hearing.”

delay before ld. CIT(A) is also condoned considering the explanation furnished by the assessee in all these bunch of appeals. 12. In ITA No. 639/JP/2024, the appeal of the assessee has not been considered on merits and the same was dismissed confirming the view of the ld. AO as the appeal was filed before ld. CIT(A) belatedly