AO (SC), AVVNL, SIKAR,SIKAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

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

condonation of delay in Filing Anneal under Section 250 of the I.T. Act. With reference to the above captioned matter, the applicant/appellant most humbly begs to submit the following reasons for your Honour's kind perusal: 1. That original appeal documents were filled on date 30/11/2018 with the honorable office. 2. That the delay in filing of Appeal

SHRI DEV NARAYAN MANDIR TRUSTJODHPURIYA,TONK vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with above directions

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Gagan Goyalshri Dev Narayan Mandir Trust Jodhpuriya, Mewai Tonk, Tonk 304 021 Pan No. Aaqts 0979J ...... Appellant

delay cannot be condoned. 5. Further, in Vedabai alias Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 122 Taxman 114 (SC), the Hon’ble Supreme Court laid down that in exercising discretion under section

SUB TREASURY OFFICER,ASIND , BHILWARA vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kamshewar Prasad Singh

SUB TREASURY OFFICER,ASIND , BHILWARA vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kamshewar Prasad Singh

SUB TREASURY OFFICER,ASIND , BHILWARA vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kamshewar Prasad Singh

SUB TREASURY OFFICER,ASIND , BHILWARA vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kamshewar Prasad Singh

GOVT. SENIOR UPADHAYAY SANSKRIT SCHOOL, SEWAR,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kamshewar Prasad Singh

GOVT. SENIOR UPADHAYAY SANSKRIT SCHOOL, SEWAR,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kamshewar Prasad Singh

GOVT. SENIOR UPADHAYAY SANSKRIT SCHOOL, SEWAR,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, all these appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kamshewar Prasad Singh

MANCAN FOUNDATION,UDAIPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 1092/Jp/2019 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :.................. Cuke Mancan Foundation, C.I.T.(Exemption) Vs. Udaipur. Jaipur. C/O-Shah Patni & Co. Chartered Accountants, S.B. One, Babu Nagar, Jln Marg, Jaipur- 302015. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aaftm 7600 K Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri Pramod Patni (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 12/01/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 29/01/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Jaipur (In Short, The Cit(E)) Dated 27/06/2019 Passed U/S 12Aa(1)(B)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act). In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds: “1. The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax Has Grossly Erred In Fact As Well As In Law In Rejection The Application For Registration U/S. 12Aa Of Income Tax Act, 1961 Of The Appellant Company:

condone the delay of 09 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for hearing. 7. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed application before the ld. CIT(E) seeking registration U/s 12AA of the Act. However, the ld. CIT(E) after considering the case of the assessee passed order U/s 12AA

OM PRAKASH AGRAWAL HUF,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(1), JAIUPR, JAIPUR

114 CCH 0245 RajHC (2022) 216 DTR\n0305 (Raj), (2022) 327 CTR 0733 (Raj) it has been held\nReassessment—Issuance of notice under section 148 after\nproceedings under Section 148A (d)—Writ petition seeks to assail\ncorrectness and validity of order passed by respondent, whereby, after\ninitiating proceedings under Section 148A (d) on formation of an\nopinion that income chargeable

SUVA LAL PAHARIA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 6(3), JAIPUR

114 CCH 0245 Raj HC (2022)\n216 DTR 0305 (Raj), (2022) 327 CTR 0733 (Raj) it has been held\n“Reassessment-Issuance of notice under section 148 after proceedings under Section\n148A (d)-Writ petition seeks to assail correctness and validity of order passed by\nrespondent, whereby, after initiating proceedings under Section 148A (d) on formation of\nan opinion that

SHRI MANOJ AMAR CHAND TAILOR,MASUDA BIJAINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BEAWAR

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

condone the delay in filing this appeal and decided to take the appeal on its merits. 4. Both these appeals are cross appeals filed by the assessee and revenue for the same assessment year. The Grounds of appeal raised by each party are as under:- ITA No. 910/JP/2019 (Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BEAWAR vs. SHRI MANOJ AMAR CHAND TAILOR, MASUDA BIJAINAGAR

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

condone the delay in filing this appeal and decided to take the appeal on its merits. 4. Both these appeals are cross appeals filed by the assessee and revenue for the same assessment year. The Grounds of appeal raised by each party are as under:- ITA No. 910/JP/2019 (Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee

SACHIN BHANDARI,JAIPUR vs. ITD WD 6(4), JPR, JAIPUR

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

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

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 Sachin Bhandari 4. Now considering the delay in filling in the appeal by the assessee we proceed to decide the appeal of the assessee

JAMBO CREDIT AND THRIFT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO-6(1),, JAIPUR

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal Feeling Aggrieved By Order Dated 12.06.2024, Passed By Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2018-19, As Thereby The Appeal Filed By The Appellant Has Been Dismissed.

condone the delay in filing of the appeal. We order accordingly. However, the applicant is burdened with costs of Rs. 3,000/- to be deposited in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund”. 5 Jambo Credit and Thrift Co-operative Society Ltd. Jaipur. Arguments have also been advanced in the appeal, on merits, today itself by both the sides. We proceed

DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. PARADISE PROPERTIES, SAROJNI MARG, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

delay of 53 days in filing the cross objection 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. 6 Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that

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