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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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)

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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

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

47,989/- and disallowance of deduction u/s 80C Rs.1.00 lac 1554/JP/24 2014-15 NFAC Delhi, dated 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

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 :

condoning part of the delay as discussed in Issue:1 above) and being out of period of limitation and the same is hereby not admitted and is dismissed in-liminie. Accordingly the grounds of appeal are not required to be taken upon merits. 5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed. 7. As the assessee

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 :

condoning part of the delay as discussed in Issue:1 above) and being out of period of limitation and the same is hereby not admitted and is dismissed in-liminie. Accordingly the grounds of appeal are not required to be taken upon merits. 5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed. 7. As the assessee

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 :

condoning part of the delay as discussed in Issue:1 above) and being out of period of limitation and the same is hereby not admitted and is dismissed in-liminie. Accordingly the grounds of appeal are not required to be taken upon merits. 5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed. 7. As the assessee

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 :

condoning part of the delay as discussed in Issue:1 above) and being out of period of limitation and the same is hereby not admitted and is dismissed in-liminie. Accordingly the grounds of appeal are not required to be taken upon merits. 5. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed. 7. As the assessee

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

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

47,989/- and\n| disallowance\n,\n| of\n| deduction u/s 80C\n| Rs.1.00 lac\n| 1554/JP/24\n| 2014-15\n| NFAC Delhi, dated 31-08-\n| 2023 condonation of\n| delay of 727 days not\n| allowed and dismissed\n| the appeal\n| 426 days\n| Dismissed the appeal\n| holding that delay in\n| filing of appeal

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