SHRI RAKESH GARH,KISHANGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, KISHANGARH

section 253(5) of the Act, we hereby 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. The Registry is directed to list the matter in due course. 13. Now we take

HARIRAM HOSPITAL,ALWAR vs. PCIT, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No. 1535/JPR/2024 निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year: 2019-20 Hariram Hospital Bye Pass Road Hariram Hospital Bhiwadi, Alwar – 310 019 (Raj) बनाम Vs. The Pr.CIT (Central) Jaipur प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AAFFH 5746 M अपीलार्थी / Appellant निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Himanshu Goyal, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue by: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Da

3) , Ahmedabad,2019 (2) TMI 1068 Condonation of delay - bonafide mistake at the end of the chief accountant - delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner - Held that:- Sub-section 5 of Section 253

RAJESH AGARWAL,VIDHYADHARA NAGAR JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WD 4(1), ITO JAIPUR

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, [\nhere in after referred as \"Act\"] by ITO, Ward-4(1), Jaipur.\n2. The assessee has marched this appeal on the following\ngrounds:-\n“1. That the learned CIT appeals erred in dismissing the appeal on\nground the appeal barred by limitation while the appeal preferred in\npaper form on 25th

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)

Section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the said additions. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action

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)

Section 11(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 The action of the Id. CIT(A) is illegal, unjustified, arbitrary and against the facts of the case. Relief may please be granted by deleting the said additions. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action

M/S JAIPUR TELECOM PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PR. CIT-2, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No.274/JPR/2021 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years :2014-15 M/s Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 3, Amrapali Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur. cuke Vs. Pr.CIT-2, Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABCJ 0763 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby :Sh. Manish Agarwal(C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Sh. Ajey Malik (CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@Date of Hearing : 15/02/2

253 (5) The Appellate Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit the filing of a memorandum of cross-objections after the expiry of the relevant period referred to in sub-section (3) or sub-section (4), if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. 8 M/S Jaipur Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 3.2 Thus

BHIM SINGH,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O, WARD 4(1), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

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

section 253(5) of the Act, we hereby condone the delay of 318 days in filing the present appeal as we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause 10 Bhim Singh vs. ITO, Ward 4(1), Jaipur for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed time and the appeal is hereby admitted for adjudication on merits. 3

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

253 ITR 798\n(SC).\"\nPrayer: In view of above facts and circumstances and with the\nsympathy and settled legal position, the delay so caused may kindly be\ncondoned.\"\n4. The Id. AR of the assessee in addition submitted that\nthe reasons of late filling is on account of the non-service of\nthe order on the email

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

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

condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute and is an admitted fact that there Sub treasury Officer Vs ACIT(TDS) has been a delay in filing the present appeal by 3 days. There is also no dispute that under section 253

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

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

condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute and is an admitted fact that there Sub treasury Officer Vs ACIT(TDS) has been a delay in filing the present appeal by 3 days. There is also no dispute that under section 253

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

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

condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute and is an admitted fact that there Sub treasury Officer Vs ACIT(TDS) has been a delay in filing the present appeal by 3 days. There is also no dispute that under section 253

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

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

condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. There is no dispute and is an admitted fact that there Sub treasury Officer Vs ACIT(TDS) has been a delay in filing the present appeal by 3 days. There is also no dispute that under section 253

SIYARAM CITY CABS LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ITD WARD 6(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes

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

CONDONATION OF DELAY U/S 253(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ("ITA") Hon'ble Sir/Madam, Siyaram City Cab Ltd. (‘’Assessee Company’’) is in receipt of order dated 24-01-2018, for the captioned assessment year assed under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("ITA") by th eld. Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) (Appeals) 3

RAM NIWAS YADAV,SHAHPURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER BEHROR, BEHROR

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

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

253 ITR 798 (SC) (v) Collector, Land & Acquisition v/s Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has advocated for a very liberal approach while considering a case for condonation of delay. The following observations of the Hon'ble Court are notable: The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting section 5 of the Limitation

MAHAVEER PRASAD JAIN,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL CIT-2, NEW CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

253 (5) The Appellate Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit the filing of a memorandum of cross-objections after the expiry of the relevant period referred to in sub-section (3) or sub-section (4), if it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. 3.2 Thus, based on that provision tribunal

GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

condonation application in appeal no ITA 185/JPR/2022 in the case of Gobind Chhangomal Sajnani. Respected Members, In the aforementioned matter, it transpires that a delay of 8 days has been marked in filing of appeal in the instant case. Ld. CIT(A) had passed the order against the Assessee on 03.03.2022. Moreover, as per sub section (3) of Section 253

INTERIO PLANET,KOTA vs. CPC INCOME TAX OR ITO , KOTA

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 86/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Cuke Interio Planet, Cpc, Income Tax Or Ito, 12, Arihant Plaza, Near Post Office, Vs. Kota. Dadabari, Kota-324009 (Raj). Pan No.: Aaffi 8208 K Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 25/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

3. That as before the Id. CIT(A) the grounds of condonation of delay has not been taken properly by the counsel or taken in summary manner as the assessee is not a technical person or does not know the procedure of appeal, condonation or drafting etc. they were depended upon the counsel or on his advice they filed

RAM KISHORE KHANDELWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 269/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Year :2015-16 Shri Ram Kishore Khandelwal, Cuke I.T.O., Vs. A-19, Jai Jawan Colony-I, Tonk Ward 6(2), Road, Jaipur-302018. Jaipur. Lfkk;H Ys[Kk La-@Thvkbzvkj La-@Pan/Gir No.: Acwpk 9167 C Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri P.C. Sharma (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By: Smt. Runi Pal(Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 29/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 16/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Jaipur Dated 31/01/2020 For The A.Y. 2015-16. 2. The Hearing Of The Appeal Was Concluded Through Video Conference In View Of The Prevailing Situation Of Covid-19 Pandemic.

section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the appeal may be admitted for hearing on merits.” 5. It was submitted by the ld AR that there was no malafide or deliberate delay in filing the present appeal and in the interest of substantial justice, the delay in filing the present appeal may be condoned and the appeal