SAKET AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(3) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

delay of\n18 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned, having\nregard to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of\nCollector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471\n(SC).\n5.\nAppeal has also been argued on merits. Assessee-appellant\nhas raised following grounds: -\n\"1.\nThat order of Learned

M/S BALAJI CHARITABLE TRUST,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 39/Jp/2021 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :...................... M/S Balaji Charitable Trust, Cuke Cit(Exemptions), Vs. 117, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Aaatb 2683 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Anant Kasliwal (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 07/03/2022 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 14/03/2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(Exemptions), Jaipur Dated 23/03/2021 Passed U/S 80G(5)(Vi) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Raised.

117, Industrial Area, Jhotwara, Jaipur Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAATB 2683 G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Anant Kasliwal (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Sanjay Dhariwal (CIT-DR) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 07/03/2022 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@ Date

M/S RAJENDRA AND URSULA HOLDINGS PVT. LTD., JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-1, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. ITA 57/JPR/2021 is also stands dismissed

condone the delay in filing this appeal and decided to take the appeal on its merits. 6. In this appeal the assessee has raised following grounds:- 1. In the facts and circumstances of the present case and as per established law and legal precedents, ld. PCIT has grossly erred in exceeding his jurisdiction in passing the Order dated

M/S RAJENDRA AND URSULA JOSHI SKILL DEVELOPEMENT PVT. LTD. JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result ITA NO. ITA 57/JPR/2021 is also stands dismissed

condone the delay in filing this appeal and decided to take the appeal on its merits. 6. In this appeal the assessee has raised following grounds:- 1. In the facts and circumstances of the present case and as per established law and legal precedents, ld. PCIT has grossly erred in exceeding his jurisdiction in passing the Order dated

PARSHAVNATH BUILDERS ,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

delay of 462 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of 6 PARSHAVNATH BUILDERS VS PCIT, UDIAPUR Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 3.1 Now we take up the appeal

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

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

condone the delay of 96\ndays in filing the appeals by the assessee in view of the decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition\nvs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee was\nprevented by sufficient cause.\n4. The fact as culled out from the records is that M/s Shiv

SHRI KIRODI MAL,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALWAR

Appeal is dismissed

delay of 18 days in filing the appeal is condoned.” 3. The assessee has filed a Miscellaneous Application (MA) against the order dated 10.10.2019 passed in ITA No. 883/JP/2017. 4. The ld. AR appeared on behalf of the assessee, in response to the MA submitted that the reasons as to why the assessee or the AR of the assessee could

KUNAN MAL KALU RAM JAIN AND COMPANY ,TONK vs. ITO,TONK, TONK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

condone the delay of 113 days in filing the appeal by the assessee 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. 3. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that

KEDAR PRASAD VIJAY,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are disposed off as per\ndirection given supra

section 143(3) r.w.s.153A and 143(3) of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 respectively. The grounds of appeal raised by the\nassessee in both the appeals are as under:-\nITA NOS. 1280 & 1281/JPR/2024\nSHRI KEDAR PRASAD VIJAY VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR\nITA No. 1280/JPR/2024 – A.Y. 2014-15\n1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred on facts

KEDAR PRASAD VIJAY,ALWAR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are disposed off as per\r\ndirection given supra

section 143(3) r.w.s.153A and 143(3) of the\r\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 respectively. The grounds of appeal raised by the\r\nassessee in both the appeals are as under:-\r\n\r\nITA NOS. 1280 & 1281/JPR/2024\r\nSHRI KEDAR PRASAD VIJAY VS ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, ALWAR\r\n\r\nITA No. 1280/JPR/2024

ACIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR vs. M/S RAJASTHAN STATE HANDLOOM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED , JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. 2 ACIT vs. M/s Rajasthan State Handloom Development corporation Ltd. 2. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 20 days in filing the appeal by the Revenue for which the ld. DR of the Revenue filed an application for condonation of delay with following prayers

INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR vs. RVCF TRUST-II, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Within 30 Days I.E. On Or Before 13.06.2022. In View Of The Above The Physical Appeal Was Filed On 19.05.2022 Well Before 12.06.2022 As Directed In The Said Mail.

condoned. 4. The Revenue raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was justified in treating the assessee as representative assessee while it should be treated as AOP, because it has derived income which is other than the income derived from investments as specified in section

JITENDRA KUMAR TAHILRAMANI,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-2, JAIPUR., JAIPUR

Bench: Him.

condone the delay before this Appellate Tribunal. 4 Jitendra Kumar TahilramanI vs. ITO 6. Now coming to the merits of the dispute, the assessee has raised following grounds: - “1. In the facts and circumstances the case and in law, Id. CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has erred in confirming the action of Id. AO in making additions

KULDEEP SINGH SHEKHAWAT,KOTA vs. ITO W-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Gagan Goyalkuldeep Singh Shekhawat, 11, Samridhi Traders, Police Line, Gopal Vihar, Baran Road-324001 Pan No. Araps0973M ...... Appellant Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Kota …... Respondent

condone the delay of 292 days in filing of appeal. 5. It is observed that during the year under consideration the assessee sold property situated at Village Deoli Arab Road, Tehsil Ladpura, and Kota for Rs. 3.08 Cr. Which was jointly owned by the assessee himself and some Mr. Naveen Kumar in 50:50, meaning thereby the share

SHRI KANHEYA LAL,AJMER vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

delay of 8 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. 3. The assessee has raised following grounds:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner(appeal) upheld the ITO’s order is correct. 2. The body of the assessment order at page 7 penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the I.T. Act are separately

SHRI KAMAL MOHAN GUPTA,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-7, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for Statistical purposes with no order as to cost

Bench: Ld. Cit(A)-111, Jaipur On Dated 19-01-2016 & Explained The Circumstances With Evidences Which Explicitly Show That Seized Gold Jewellery Is Highly Excessive Valued By Departmental Valuer During The Year Course Of Seizure & That Too In Absence Of Owner Of Goods. Thus Interim Order For Revaluation Of Seized Jewellery May Please Be Allowed.

delay is condoned. 3.1 Brief facts in this case are that an information received by NSCBI Airport, Kolkata on 30.10.2013 as the assessee- Shri Kamal Mohan Gupta was carrying with him large quantity of gold ornaments. He was asked to produce the supporting documents in respect of the source, ownership, possession and application of the said Gold ornaments

DIVYA AGROFOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED,KOTA RAJASTHAN vs. DCIT,ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, KOTA, KOTA RAJASTHAN

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

section 144B of the Income Tax Act, [for short Act ] by the National Faceless Assessment Centre [ for short AO ]. 2 Divya Agrofood Product Pvt. Ltd. 2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds:- “1. That the Ld. CIT(A)-Faceless grossly erred in passing the ex-parte order. 2. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in reopening

MOHIT METALS PRIVATE LIMITED,BHIWADI vs. CIT (APPEALS), NFAC

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

delays so made in filing the appeals are condoned. 3.1 The Ground No. 1 raised by the ld. AR of the assessee is general in nature which does not require any adjudication. 4.1 The Ground No. 2 and 3 of the assessee are interrelated and interconnected and also relates to challenging the order of ld.CIT(A) in upholding the addition

ITO, WAR-4(1), JAIPUR vs. SHRI AMIT AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

condoned. 3 ITA 267/JP/2020_ ITO Vs Amit Agarwal 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is proprietor of M/s Nandi International and engaged in import and trading of Glass Chaton, Glass beads and silver jewellery. The assessee filed his return of income on 27/09/2014 declaring total income of Rs. 9,01,270/-. The case