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 :

condonation as a threshold issue; record that the assessee misrepresented facts and failed to show sufficient cause. 4. On merits, uphold the transfer under Section 127 and dismiss the challenge. 5. The Revenue requests that the above submission may be taken on record as a part of hearing while deciding the Appeal of the Assessee in issue of transfer

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 :

condonation as a threshold issue; record that the assessee misrepresented facts and failed to show sufficient cause. 4. On merits, uphold the transfer under Section 127 and dismiss the challenge. 5. The Revenue requests that the above submission may be taken on record as a part of hearing while deciding the Appeal of the Assessee in issue of transfer

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 :

condonation as a threshold issue; record that the assessee misrepresented facts and failed to show sufficient cause. 4. On merits, uphold the transfer under Section 127 and dismiss the challenge. 5. The Revenue requests that the above submission may be taken on record as a part of hearing while deciding the Appeal of the Assessee in issue of transfer

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 :

condonation as a threshold issue; record that the assessee misrepresented facts and failed to show sufficient cause. 4. On merits, uphold the transfer under Section 127 and dismiss the challenge. 5. The Revenue requests that the above submission may be taken on record as a part of hearing while deciding the Appeal of the Assessee in issue of transfer

PAPPU JAISWAL,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(2), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condoning the delay. The individual grounds of appeal are discussed here under- Grounds of Appeal 1. That In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned CIT (A) has erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee simply on the ground of alleged non compliance of opportunity granted by him whereas the appeal required

SETH RB MOONDHRA MEMORIAL CHARITABLE TRUST,BANI PARK ,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION(1), JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

43,272/- [ page 2 3 SETH R B MOONDHRA MEMORIAL CHAIRTABLE TRUST VS CIT (E)-1, JAIPUR of the impugned intimation in question]. The CPC also while taxing the income charged the tax at Maximum Marginal Rate [ MMR] and has not considered that the assessee is a trust registered u/s. 12A [ page 83 registration certificate ] merely because the assessee while

DEV GROUP,ALWAR vs. ITO,WARD BEHROR, BEHROR

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

Bench: Him.

section of the I.T. Act, 1961-Assessee preferred rectification application to AO to rectify his order for Assessment Year 1994-95 and Assessment Year1996-97-Rectification application was rejected by AO-CIT(A) upheld order of AO- Assessee filed application for condonation of delay in filling appeal against order of CIT(A)-Tribunal held that assessee simply put responsibility

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

GOVT. SENIOR UPADHAYAY SANSKRIT SCHOOL, SEWAR,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

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

b) Poonja Arcade v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 123/191 Taxman 291 (Kar.) (c) Vedabai Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798/122 Taxman 114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested

GOVT. SENIOR UPADHAYAY SANSKRIT SCHOOL, SEWAR,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

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

b) Poonja Arcade v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 123/191 Taxman 291 (Kar.) (c) Vedabai Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798/122 Taxman 114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested

GOVT. SENIOR UPADHAYAY SANSKRIT SCHOOL, SEWAR,AJMER vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

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

b) Poonja Arcade v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 123/191 Taxman 291 (Kar.) (c) Vedabai Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798/122 Taxman 114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested

JAIPUR SAHAKARI KRYA VIKRAYA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WD 5(2) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Bench: The Registry On 30-06-2025. By Way Of First Mentioned Appeal, Assessee Has Challenged Order Dated 18-03-2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2018-19, Whereby Appeal Filed By Assessee Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 31-03-2021 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Has Been Dismissed, As Not 2

B-34,Surajpol Mandi Vs. Ward 5(2) Jaipur- 302 003 (Raj) Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJJ0166G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri G.M. Mehta, CA. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 25 /09/2025

JAIPUR SAHAKARI KRAYA VIKRAYA SAMITI,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 5(2), JAIPUR , JAIPUR

Bench: The Registry On 30-06-2025. By Way Of First Mentioned Appeal, Assessee Has Challenged Order Dated 18-03-2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2018-19, Whereby Appeal Filed By Assessee Challenging The Assessment Order Dated 31-03-2021 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Act, Has Been Dismissed, As Not 2

B-34,Surajpol Mandi Vs. Ward 5(2) Jaipur- 302 003 (Raj) Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAJJ0166G vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri G.M. Mehta, CA. jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 25 /09/2025

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)

condone the delay of 220 days 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. 4. Now, coming to the merits of the case, the assessee has marched this appeal on the following grounds of appeal

SHRI VERDHMAN STHANAKVASI JAIN SHRISANGH,KOTA vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assesseeis allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay in filling the appeals by the assessee. 4. Brief facts of this case are that the assesseefiled application in Form No. 10AB seeking registration u/s 12AB of the Income TaxAct, 1961 was filed by the assesseeonline on 27.12.2022. A letter/notice No.ITBA/EXM/F/EXM43/2023- 24/1051873342(1) dated 05.04.2023 was issued at the e-mail/address provided in the application

SHIV VEGPRO PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PCIT-UDAIPUR , UDAIPUR

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

43 B (e) could not be invoked. Further, Section 263\nwas invoked merely stating that the issue requires further evidence.\nOnce the relevant details were before the Ld. CIT she should have\ndecided the issue on merit instead it sending back to AO. Section 263\ncan only be invoked only if thereis a fault and there is an error

RAM DEV CHANDELWAL,S/O SHRI HEERA LAL CHANDELWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - BUNDI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

43,028/-.” 3. At the outset of the hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 4 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee. The 3 Ram Dev Chandel vs. ITO ld. AR of the assessee relied on an application for condonation of delay with following prayers: “Respected Sir, In this case the Learned

ASHOK KUMAR JAIN,KOTA vs. ITO WD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

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

b) Any other order, which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and proper, be also passed in\nfavour of applicant-assessee.”\n3.\nDuring the course of hearing, the ld. DR not objected to assessee's\napplication for condonation of delay and prayed that Court may decidethe\nissue as deem fit in the interest of justice as delay