SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

II. Misrepresentation of Facts in Condonation of Delay In the matter of: Assessee’s plea for condonation of delay and reliance on misquoted Rajasthan High Court order dated 05.07.2024 1. Chronology: o Assessment order received: 18.04.2024(as per assessee version) o Limitation expired: 18.05.2024 o Writ filed: 12.06.2024 (after limitation) 2. Consequently, the writ could not have caused the delay

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

II. Misrepresentation of Facts in Condonation of Delay In the matter of: Assessee’s plea for condonation of delay and reliance on misquoted Rajasthan High Court order dated 05.07.2024 1. Chronology: o Assessment order received: 18.04.2024(as per assessee version) o Limitation expired: 18.05.2024 o Writ filed: 12.06.2024 (after limitation) 2. Consequently, the writ could not have caused the delay

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

II. Misrepresentation of Facts in Condonation of Delay In the matter of: Assessee’s plea for condonation of delay and reliance on misquoted Rajasthan High Court order dated 05.07.2024 1. Chronology: o Assessment order received: 18.04.2024(as per assessee version) o Limitation expired: 18.05.2024 o Writ filed: 12.06.2024 (after limitation) 2. Consequently, the writ could not have caused the delay

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

II. Misrepresentation of Facts in Condonation of Delay In the matter of: Assessee’s plea for condonation of delay and reliance on misquoted Rajasthan High Court order dated 05.07.2024 1. Chronology: o Assessment order received: 18.04.2024(as per assessee version) o Limitation expired: 18.05.2024 o Writ filed: 12.06.2024 (after limitation) 2. Consequently, the writ could not have caused the delay

TANUJ JAIN,JAIPUR vs. ITO WD-7(2),JPR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with no order as to cost

35 that\n\"Condonation of delay shall be given at the time of hearing”. Therefore, in these\ncircumstances, the ld.Addl. CIT(A) was not to remind the assessee, when s the\nassessee himself was alive to the issue and very well knew that this appeal is not in\ntime. Therefore, it was all the more necessary for the assessee

ITO, WAR-4(1), JAIPUR vs. SHRI AMIT AGARWAL, JAIPUR

In the result, this appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am

condoned. 3 ITA 267/JP/2020_ ITO Vs Amit Agarwal 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is proprietor of M/s Nandi International and engaged in import and trading of Glass Chaton, Glass beads and silver jewellery. The assessee filed his return of income on 27/09/2014 declaring total income of Rs. 9,01,270/-. The case

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

35 - However, order of Commissioner (Appeals)was not served on aforesaid address - Further, assessee filed appeal before Tribunal within prescribed period of 60 days from date of receipt of order of Commissioner (Appeals) -Whether, therefore, there was no delay on part of assessee to prefer appeal after receipt of order of Commissioner (Appeals) - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, Tribunal ought

BHANU PARKASH BANSAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD2(3), JAIPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee in ITA No

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

condonation of delay wherein the Bench does not find any sufficient and reasonable cause for late filing the appeal by the assessee. Hence, the same is dismissed. 3.1 Now the Bench feels that the case of the assessee should also be adjudicated upon on merit wherein the crux of the issue in the appeal relates to late deposit of employees

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

A BLISS OF CREATOR SOCIETY,JAIPUR vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed with no order as to cost

35, dated 17-09-2021 is enclosed for\nyour ready reference.\n7.\nThat the delay in filing of appeal was because assessee\nsociety gets to know about the demand when they get the\nreminder of outstanding payment & the time taken in process of\nremedy by assessee society and time taken in proper legal\nconsultancy and engagement of new counsel which

DYNAMIC POWERTECH PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

35 and therefore, the prayer by the assessee for condonation of delay of 81 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the assessee. Thus the delay of 81 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

35\nTaxman 227 (Patna)/[1988] 171 ITR 405 (Patna)/[1988] 67 CTR 75 (Patna) [10-\n09-1987] it was held by Hon'ble Patna High Court as under.-\nX\nX\nX\nX\nC.2 Issue 1: date of service of the assessment order under challenge in the\nappeal:-\nHowever in the order in the writ petition there is mention regarding

DUNGAR SINGH MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’Ble

1 That both the lower authorities have erred in law as well in facts of the case in assuming jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. 2 That the Id CIT(A)-NFAC have erred in law as well in facts of the case is dismissing the appeal owing to delay in filing form 35, without appreciating reasonable & sufficient

DUNGAR SINGH MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’Ble

1 That both the lower authorities have erred in law as well in facts of the case in assuming jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. 2 That the Id CIT(A)-NFAC have erred in law as well in facts of the case is dismissing the appeal owing to delay in filing form 35, without appreciating reasonable & sufficient

DUNGAR SINGH MEENA ,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’Ble

1 That both the lower authorities have erred in law as well in facts of the case in assuming jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. 2 That the Id CIT(A)-NFAC have erred in law as well in facts of the case is dismissing the appeal owing to delay in filing form 35, without appreciating reasonable & sufficient

DUNGAR SINGH MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon’Ble

1 That both the lower authorities have erred in law as well in facts of the case in assuming jurisdiction u/s 148 of the Income Tax Act. 2 That the Id CIT(A)-NFAC have erred in law as well in facts of the case is dismissing the appeal owing to delay in filing form 35, without appreciating reasonable & sufficient

MAGENDRA SINGH RATHORE,ALWAR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

condonation as the assessee is not going to achieve any benefit for the delay in fact the assessee is at risk. 4. The brief facts of the case in ITA No. 460/JPR/2024, as culled out from the records are that a search and seizure action u/s 132 of the Act and/or survey action u/s 133A of the Act was carried

DUNGAR SINGH MEENA,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 7(2), JAIPUR

In the result, these appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to\nadvance substantial justice.\"\n\n18. (ii)In Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy [(2013) (12) SCC 649], the\nHon'ble Supreme Court has culled out the principles applicable to an application for\ncondonation of delay and the same are profitably reproduced hereunder:\n\n\"(i)\nThere