NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay duly as per law specifying the reasons of delay. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in confirming the action ld.AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, arbitrarily. 2.1 That, ld.CIT(A) has further erred in confirming the action ld.AO

VIVEK SHIKSHA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION - 1,, JAIPUR

In the result ground no. 2 raised by the assessee stands

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1134 & 1135/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2014-15 & 2016-17 Vivek Shiksha Samiti Jobner Road, Kalwar, VIA Jhotwara, Jaipur. cuke Vs. The ITO, Exemption-1, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AABTV0361Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Khandelwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri Gatum Singh Choudhary

condone the Vivek Shiksha Samiti vs. ITO (E) dealy in filling the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Based on these observations ground no. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed. 12. Ground no. 2 raised by the assessee relates to the charging of the assessee trust income at MMR. The ld. AR of the assessee submitted that since

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, NCR BUILDING, STATUE CIRCLE, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SIRGANGANAGAR vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX/INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -6(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ACIT/DCIT CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,JAIPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove

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

31-08- Dismissed the appeal 426 days 2023 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 727 days not filing of appeal is not allowed and dismissed condoned, appeal the appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- Dismissed the appeal 152 days 2024 condonation of holding that delay in delay of 551 days not filing of appeal

RAGHAV DANGAYACH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(1) JPR, JAIPUR

15. As a result, the application seeking condonation of delay is hereby dismissed

Bench: SHRIGAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 3 of the Limitation Act; (v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence

SHAILENDRA GARG,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 6, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assesseeare allowed for statistical

31-08- 2023 condonation of delay of 727 days not allowed and dismissed the appeal 426 days Dismissed the appeal holding that delay in filing of appeal is not condoned, appeal dismissed 1560/JP/2024 2015-16 NFAC Delhi, dated 30-05- 2024 condonation of delay of 551 days not allowed and dismissed the appeal 152 days Dismissed the appeal holding that

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU SHEKSHANIK AND SAMAJIK SANSTHAN,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR

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

condone such delay on authorities concerned - Held,yes [Paras 31 and 33] [In favour of assessee] 14 Jawaharlal Nehru Shekshanik And Samajik Sansthan vs. Exemption Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Shree Jain Swetamber Murtipujak Tapagachha Sangh vs Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) [2024] 161 Taxmann.com 114 (Bombay) has held as under: Section

SHRI SHANIDEV CHARITABLE TRUST,AJMER vs. CIT EXEMPTION, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

The appeals are hereby dismissed being barred by limitation

Bench: Learned Cit(E), Jaipur By Way Of Two Application I.E. One U/S 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act ( In Short “The Act”) To Seek Its Registration. Shri Shanidev Charitable Trust, Ajmer. Another Application Were Also Presented By The Applicant Before Learned Cit(E) Seeking Approval U/S 80G Of The Act.

Section 3 of the Limitation Act; (v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence