DCIT, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR, NCRB, JAIPUR vs. PARADISE PROPERTIES, SAROJNI MARG, JAIPUR

In the result appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A).

delay of 53 days in filing the cross objection by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble 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. 6 Succinctly, the fact as culled out from the records is that

ELCON DRUGS & FORMULATION LTD.,JAIPUR vs. JCIT(OSD), CIRCLE-4, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

delay of 136 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 vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- 4 Elcon Drugs & Formation

AKSH OPTIFIBRE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 2, ALWAR

In the result, all the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay\nhas been filed by the assessee wherein it has been specifically submitted that the\ndelay was because of the order was not received proper time.The applicationreads\nas under :-\n\"Along with the order of CIT(A), Alwar, as attached in our enclosures to the appeal filed\nbefore Hon'ble Jaipur Benches of ITAT, also contains the copy

SHIKSHA VIBHAG KARMCHARI SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,BUNDI vs. ITO, BUNDI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condone delay in filing income tax return and allowed the deduction u/s 80P of the Income Tax Act 1961. 5. In first appeal the Learned CIT(A) has not allowed deduction claimed u/s.80P of the Act without appreciating the fact that in order to claim the deduction, the assessee should file its return of income making a claim within

RAJESH KUMAR AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1, JPR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Date Of Hearing Of Appeal.”

section 32AB in a manner even more stringent than the requirement of the filing of the return itself” 8. Madras High Court in CIT v. A.N. Arunachalam [1994] 208 ITR 481/ 75 Taxman 529and in CIT v. Jayant Patel [2001] 248 ITR l99/117 Taxman 707 (Mad.) “Held that the filing of audit report along with the return was not mandatory

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

481, relying on the said decision came to the conclusion that there is no distinction between the entries in the names of the partners and those in the names of the third parties, and the nature of the entry is not distinguishable. Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT In the absence of a satisfactory explanation, it is open to the Department

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JODHPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

481, relying on the said decision came to the conclusion that there is no distinction between the entries in the names of the partners and those in the names of the third parties, and the nature of the entry is not distinguishable. Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT In the absence of a satisfactory explanation, it is open to the Department

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

481, relying on the said decision came to the conclusion that there is no distinction between the entries in the names of the partners and those in the names of the third parties, and the nature of the entry is not distinguishable. Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT In the absence of a satisfactory explanation, it is open to the Department

SANJAY KUMAR KARNANI,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

Bench: AO on 12-04-2021 18. Reply filed before AO on 15-07-2021 19. Additional Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 on 11-11-2024 20. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2014-15 21. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2015-16 on 10-10-2024 22. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2016-17 on 10-10-2024 23. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2017-18 on 15-10-2024 24. Written Submissions filed before CIT(A) for AY 2018-19 on 15-10-2024 25.

481, relying on the said decision came to the conclusion that there is no distinction between the entries in the names of the partners and those in the names of the third parties, and the nature of the entry is not distinguishable. Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT In the absence of a satisfactory explanation, it is open to the Department

SHRI AMBICA GARMENTS, JODHPUR,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE-3, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are disposed off in terms of

481, relying on the said decision came to the conclusion that there is no distinction between the entries in the names of the partners and those in the names of the third parties, and the nature of the entry is not distinguishable. Shri Ambika Garments vs. ACIT In the absence of a satisfactory explanation, it is open to the Department