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

ZILA PARYAWARN SUDHAR SAMITI,JHUNJHUNU vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay in filing the appeal is allowed. 4. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal. ‘’1. In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(Exemptions), Jaipur has erred in withdrawing the registration u/s 12AA of the I.T. Act, 1961. The action of the ld. CIT(Exemptions) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary

MONIKA JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(1), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

condone the delay of 231 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. 6. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that

SANGA AUTOMOBILES (P) LTD,JAIPUR vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE - 7,, 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)

section 144 of the Income Tax Act, [Here in after referred as “Act” ] by the AO. 2 Sanga Automobiles (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT 2.1 At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 249 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation

JAI SINGH JADEJA,KOTA vs. ITO-WARD-2(1) KOTA, KOTA

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

Bench: Sh. Sandep Gosain & Dr. M. L. Meena

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits of the case. 3. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the ld. JCIT(A) was not justified in confirming the finding of the AO in order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act by restricting the credit of TDS at Rs.43,464/- as against the claimed

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

delay is condoned. 4.2 I have gone through the assessment order and record available. Brief facts of the case are that the reassessment of Sunrise Real consultancy Private Limited for A.Y. 2013-14, conducted under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee company did not file its return for A.Y. 2013-14, despite significant transactions, including- Purchase

SUNRISE REALCONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED ,BHIWADI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-BHIWADI, BHIWADI

delay\nis condoned.\n4.2 I have gone through the assessment order and record available. Brief facts of\nthe case are that the reassessment of Sunrise Real consultancy Private Limited\nfor A.Y. 2013-14, conducted under Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The\nassessee company did not file its return for A.Y. 2013-14, despite significant\ntransactions, including- Purchase