SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL JAIPUR , JAIPUR

delay and the same is condoned.\n8. The brief facts as culled out from the records are that asessee is a company and derives income from retail and wholesale sale of woods, timber, laminates and adhesives and allied activities. A search & seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried

AHLUWALIA ERECTORS AND FEBRICATIONS PVT. LTD.,KOTA vs. ACIT CIR-1 KOTA , KOTA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

condone the delay of 569 days in view of the decision of Hon’ble 8 Ahluwalia Erectors & Febricators Pvt. Ltd., vs. ACIT 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. 7. Now, coming to the merits of the issue the brief facts

PINCITY JEWLHOUSE PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. PCIT, CC, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the date of hearing." 3. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 58 days in filing of the present appeal by the assessee for which the Id. AR of 3

delay of 58 days filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 6. Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee filed his income tax return for A.Y. 2015-16 on 30.11.2015 declaring total income of Rs. 4,68,02,540/-. The assessee company claimed deduction

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LTD ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) JAIPUR , JAIPUR

delay of 41 days in filing the\nappeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs.\nMst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee was\nprevented by sufficient cause in bringing the present appeal with\ndelay and the same is condoned

BKLG VENDORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(4) JAIPUR, JAIPUR RAJASTHAN

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 r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short Act ] and thus raising therein following ground of appeal:- 2 BKLG VENDORS PVT LTD VS ITO, WARD 1(4), JAIPUR ‘’1. The impugned assessment order dated 16.03.2024 passed u/s r.w.s. 144B is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other

MODERN PUBLIC VIKAS SAMITI TONK,TONK vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA Nos. 276 & 275/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year :- Modern Public Vikas Samiti Mohalla Shorgaran Subhash Bazar, Tonk – 304 001 cuke Vs. The CIT (Exemption) Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABAM 1303 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@

276 & 275/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Year :- cuke Modern Public Vikas Samiti The CIT (Exemption) Mohalla Shorgaran Subhash Bazar, Vs. Jaipur Tonk – 304 001 LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABAM 1303 J vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Gargieya, Advocate jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by: Shri Ajay Malik

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR vs. KARNANI SOLVEX PRIVATE LIMITED, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

condone the delay of 5 (five) days in filing the appeal\nbefore us.\nThe brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company, filed its return\nof income on 21.09.2012 declaring a total income of Rs.2,25,82,056/- and the\nassessment was completed under section 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 at an income

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

delay in filing Form No.10AB deserved to be condoned. 7. Otherwise also, CBDT vide Circular No.7/2024 dt. 25.04.2024 has extended the time for filing the application for permanent approval till 30.06.2024 whereas in earlier Circular No.6/2023 dt. 24.05.2023 the time for filing application for permanent approval u/s 80G was not extended till 30.09.2023. Therefore, on harmonious interpretation of both

VARDHMAN SATHANAKVASI JAIN SRAVAK SANGH,AJMER vs. CIT(E), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

delay in filing Form No.10AB deserved to be condoned. 7. Otherwise also, CBDT vide Circular No.7/2024 dt. 25.04.2024 has extended the time for filing the application for permanent approval till 30.06.2024 whereas in earlier Circular No.6/2023 dt. 24.05.2023 the time for filing application for permanent approval u/s 80G was not extended till 30.09.2023. Therefore, on harmonious interpretation of both