SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

condone the delay of 240 days in filing of both these appeals. 4. The assessee has raised common grounds in these two appeals as under :- ITA No. 152/JP/2018 A.Y. 2007-08 : “ 1. That on facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT (A) has erred in not adjudicating the ground that the ld. Assessing Officer has erred

ACIT, JAIPUR vs. SHRI KALYAN BUILDMART PVT. LTD., JAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

condone the delay of 240 days in filing of both these appeals. 4. The assessee has raised common grounds in these two appeals as under :- ITA No. 152/JP/2018 A.Y. 2007-08 : “ 1. That on facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld. CIT (A) has erred in not adjudicating the ground that the ld. Assessing Officer has erred

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VIPUL BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved.” • Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT v. U.K. Paints (Overseas) Ltd. (supra

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. VAIBHAV BANKA, SIKAR

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

132A of the Act, 1961. However, the completed/unabated assessments can be re-opened by the AO in exercise of powers under Sections 147/148 of the Act, subject to fulfilment of the conditions as envisaged/mentioned under sections 147/148 of the Act and those powers are saved.” • Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of DCIT v. U.K. Paints (Overseas) Ltd. (supra

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-KOTA, CENTRAL CIRCLE, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

delays so occurred in respect of both the appeals of the assessee are condoned. 3.1 Now we take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.826/JPR/2025 for the assessment year 2017-18 for adjudication. 4.1 Apropos grounds of appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed

UPENDRA KUMAR SONI,KOTA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CORCLE-KOTA, KOTA

In the result, both the appeals of the assesee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

delays so occurred in respect of both the appeals of the assessee are condoned. 3.1 Now we take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.826/JPR/2025 for the assessment year 2017-18 for adjudication. 4.1 Apropos grounds of appeal of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18, it is noticed that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed

RAMAKANT SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. ITO, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 264/Jp/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Shri Ramakant Sharma, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. S/O- Shri Ramesh Chand Sharma, 1 Ward-3(5), Vimal Kunaj, Vidyut Nagar, Behind Jaipur. Bharat Petrol Pump, Jaipur. Pan No.: Bjrps 5130 A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Vedant Agarwal (Adv) & Shri Satish Gupta (Ca) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Ambrish Bedi (Cit-Dr) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 26/11/2020 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 07/12/2020 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Jaipur Dated 05/12/2016 For The A.Y. 2007-08. Following Grounds Have Been Taken By The Assessee: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. Lower Authorities Grossly Erred In Initiating Reassessment Proceedings U/S 147 Of The Act. 2. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law Also Ld. A.O. Grossly Erred In Resuming Jurisdiction Without Serving Notice U/S 148 On The Appellant Assessee As Notice Issued U/S 148 Was Not Served On The Appellant.

delay in filing the appeal is condoned.” 5. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had not filed return of income. Subsequently, a notice U/s 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) was issued to the assessee on 14/05/2012 and the assessment was completed by the A.O. U/s 147 r.w.s

STATE BANK OF INDIA (EARLIER KNOWN AS SBBJ),AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS), AJMER, AJMER

132A, after the\nexpiry of one month from the date on which he was served with a notice under sub-\nsection (1) of section 153A or sub-section (2) of section 153C or after the\ncompletion of the assessment, whichever is earlier.\nThus, the notice issued by the Ld. AO and the proceedings concluded\nthereafter was illegaland non-curable u/s-292BB

M/S VIJAYETA BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

In the result, the ground of the assessee’s appeal is allowed

condone the delay in filing the present appeal as we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed time and the appeal is hereby admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee company has submitted an application praying for raising the following additional ground of appeal which reads as under:- “That

A AND J INDUSTRIAL AND FINANCIAL CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

132A, then the Assessing Officer is\nobliged to issue notice under section 153A, requiring such person to furnish\nreturn of income of six years in the prescribed form for the immediately preceding\nthe year of search. The Assessing Officer is legally required to assess or re-\nassess the total income of six assessment years immediately preceding to the\nyear

VIKAS DUGAR L/H OF LATE SHRI KESHARI SINGH DUGAR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: or in the course of hearing of the appeal.”

delay is condoned. 6. As stated above, the present appeal has been filed by the Legal heir of the deceased assessee, Mr. Kesari Dugar, which has been assessed to tax for year under consideration vide assessment order dated 11.01.2021 u/s 153A of the Act. As per the assessee, it has duly filed all the information and details as called during

VIKAS DUGAR LEGAL HEIR OF LATE SHRI KESHARI SINGH DUGAR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

delay is condoned. 6. As stated above, the present appeal has been filed by the Legal heir of the deceased assessee, Mr. Kesari Dugar, which has been assessed to tax for year under consideration vide assessment order dated 11.01.2021 u/s 153A of the Act. As per the assessee, it has duly filed all the information and details as called during

VIKAS DUGAR L/H OF LATE SHRI KESHARI SINGH DUGAR,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result, the all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

delay is condoned. 6. As stated above, the present appeal has been filed by the Legal heir of the deceased assessee, Mr. Kesari Dugar, which has been assessed to tax for year under consideration vide assessment order dated 11.01.2021 u/s 153A of the Act. As per the assessee, it has duly filed all the information and details as called during

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR DUSAD, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that\nrevenue stands dismissed

delay of one\nday. Considering that aspect of the matter the bench condone the\ndelay one day.\n3. The Grounds of appeal raised in the cross appeal of the\nRevenue and assessee are as under:-\nITA No.1149/JP/2024 – A.Y. 2017-18 (Revenue)\n“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.\nCIT(A) has erred

PRADEEP KUMAR DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed and that\nrevenue stands dismissed

delay of one\nday. Considering that aspect of the matter the bench condone the\ndelay one day.\n3. The Grounds of appeal raised in the cross appeal of the\nRevenue and assessee are as under:-\nITA No.1149/JP/2024 – A.Y. 2017-18 (Revenue)\n“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Id.\nCIT(A) has erred

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR vs. MAHAVEER KUMAR JAIN, JAIPUR

delay caused for 13 days in filling the appeal is condoned in the interest of equity and justice. However, the Department should be vigilant in filing the appealsin time in future. 3. First of all, we take up the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No. 469/JP/2024 & C.O.No. 7/JP/2024 for adjudication. 5 ITA NO. 469 & 470/JP/2024 DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE

PRADEEP KUMAR LADIWALA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.1071 & 1069/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pradeep Kumar Ladiwala बनाम CIT(A), 242 Haryana Colony, Barkat Vs. Jaipur-4, Jaipur Nagar, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AARPL 0752 F अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by: None राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

condone the delay in bringing the present appeals i.e. of 3 days. 5. Firstly, we take up the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18 in ITA No. 1069/JP/2024. 6. The brief facts of the case are that a search & seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") was carried

PRADEEP KUMAR LADIWALA,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JAIPUR

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.1071 & 1069/JP/2024 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pradeep Kumar Ladiwala बनाम CIT(A), Jaipur-4, Jaipur 242 Haryana Colony, Barkat Vs. Nagar, Tonk Phatak, Jaipur स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AARPL 0752 F अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओर से/Assessee by: None राजस्व की ओर से / Revenue by: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-Sr. DR सुनवाई की ता

condone the delay in bringing the present appeals i.e. of 3 days. 5. Firstly, we take up the appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2017-18 in ITA No. 1069/JP/2024. 6. The brief facts of the case are that a search & seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter "the Act") was carried