WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,KOTA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), KOTA, KOTA

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

section 143(3) & 147 r.w.s 144B of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 [ for short \"Act\"] passed by the DCIT, Circle – 2,\nKota for one year and for two year by the Assessment Unit of Income Tax\nDepartment [ for short AO].\n2. Since the issues involved in these appeals in ITA Nos.1007 to\n1009/JP/2025 for A.Ys

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

80P - Assessee against impugned order filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals) with a delay of 11 days and sought condonation of delay in filing appeal stating that delay was due to non-availability of its legal consultant - Commissioner (Appeals) refused to condone delay and dismissed appeal in limine - Whether since filing an appeal in tax matters 13 Nirmal Kumar Agrawal

PALAS GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,SIKAR vs. ITO, SIKAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

80P\nread with Section 80A(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.\n5. The appellant prays for leave to add, to amend, to delete, or modify the all\nor any grounds of appeal on or before the hearing of appeal.\n3. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of\n344 days in filing

KATRATHAL GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED ,KATRATHAL vs. ITO WARD 1 SIKAR, SIKAR

Condonation of delay under clause (b) of sub-section (2) Section 119 of\r\nthe Income Tax Act for returns of income claiming deduction u/s 80P

THIKARIYA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD ,THIKARIYA vs. AO CPCITO WARD SIKAR, SIKAR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

80P by the assesses with following narration. ''Sub: Condonation of delay under clause (b) of sub-section (2) Section 119 of the Income

JAMBO CREDIT AND THRIFT CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO-6(1),, JAIPUR

Bench: This Appellate Tribunal Feeling Aggrieved By Order Dated 12.06.2024, Passed By Learned Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi, Relating To The Assessment Year 2018-19, As Thereby The Appeal Filed By The Appellant Has Been Dismissed.

condone the delay in filing of the appeal. We order accordingly. However, the applicant is burdened with costs of Rs. 3,000/- to be deposited in “Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund”. 5 Jambo Credit and Thrift Co-operative Society Ltd. Jaipur. Arguments have also been advanced in the appeal, on merits, today itself by both the sides. We proceed

ARAVALI BUILDHOMES LLP,JAIPUR vs. AO CPC, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condoned for adequate reasons demonstrated by the Revenue then even where delay occurs for reasons not attributable to the Revenue also. In the absence of any other argument, we do not see how in the facts as considered by different Courts in the decisions relied upon by the ld. AR, why they should not be applied. Once it has been

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay. The Affidavit of the\nassessee reads as under :-\n\"AFFIDAVIT\nI, Narendra Kumar Goswami S/o Shri Ram Chandra Goswami Age 61 years resident of\nAB-217, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur-302019 (Raj.) do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as\nunder.\n1. That I am the Counsel for the assessee in the present matter and am fully competent

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay. The Affidavit of the\nassessee reads as under :-\n“AFFIDAVIT\n3\nITA No. 243 Το 246/JPR/2025\nRMS Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Ltd., Jaipur.\nI, Narendra Kumar Goswami S/o Shri Ram Chandra Goswami Age 61 years resident of\nAB-217, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur-302019 (Raj.) do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as\nunder.\n1. That

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay. The Affidavit of the\nassessee reads as under :-\n“AFFIDAVIT\nITA No. 243 Το 246/JPR/2025\nRMS Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Ltd., Jaipur.\nI, Narendra Kumar Goswami S/o Shri Ram Chandra Goswami Age 61 years resident of\nAB-217, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur-302019 (Raj.) do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as\nunder.\n1. That

RMS KARAMCHARI BACHAT AND SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-1(2), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay. The Affidavit of the\nassessee reads as under :-\n\n“AFFIDAVIT\n\n3\nITA No. 243 Το 246/JPR/2025\nRMS Karamchari Bachat and Sakh Sahakari Samiti Ltd., Jaipur.\n\nI, Narendra Kumar Goswami S/o Shri Ram Chandra Goswami Age 61 years resident of\nAB-217, Nirman Nagar, Jaipur-302019 (Raj.) do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as\nunder

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)

section 80P. 2. The appellant gives credit facilities only to its members and no other person outside the society. Only the members of the society can avail loan from the appellant. The appellant generates income only from its members that is income generated in-house and no other outsider is involved in the earning activities. Therefore, income of the appellant

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

section 143(3) of the Act, has been dismissed, as not 2 ITANO. 990 & 991/JPR/2025 JAIPUR SAHAKARI KRAYA VIKARAYA SAMITI VS ITO WARD 5(2), JAIPUR maintainable, and consequently the only addition on account of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P has been upheld. 2. By way of second appeal, assessee has challenged order dated 18-03-2025 passed

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

section 143(3) of the Act, has been dismissed, as not 2 ITANO. 990 & 991/JPR/2025 JAIPUR SAHAKARI KRAYA VIKARAYA SAMITI VS ITO WARD 5(2), JAIPUR maintainable, and consequently the only addition on account of disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P has been upheld. 2. By way of second appeal, assessee has challenged order dated 18-03-2025 passed

KRYA VIKRAYA SAHAKARI SAMITI LIMITED DEOLI,DEOLI TONK vs. ITO TONK, TONK

Appeal of the appellant is dismissed and the order of the AO is confirmed

Bench: Him.

condone the delay of 152 days in filing the appeal before us. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the return of income declaring total income at Rs. NIL was filed electronically on 30.10.2017 vide acknowledgement No. 269409091301017 which was processed u/s 143(1) by the CPC. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment through manual selection criteria

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, ALWAR, ALWAR vs. ALWAR ZILA DUGDH UTPADAK SAHAKARI SANGH LTD., ALWAR

In the result, the Cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

80P(2)(d) of the Act and thereby a sum of Rs. 15,91,846/- was disallowed. 6. Feeling dissatisfied, the assessee carried the matter before the ld. CIT(A). A propose to the grounds so raised the findings of the ld. CIT(A) is reiterated here in below:- 10 ITA No. 634 & CO. No. 7/JPR/2023 ACIT vs. Alwar Zila

ITO(TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

2. At the outset of the hearing, the Bench observed that there is a delay of 30 days in filing of the present appeal by the revenue. In support revenue filed a petition for condonation prayer dated 26.05.2023 sating that the delay was on account of the technical glitches as the order could not be seen in path of appeal

INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), AJMER vs. DIVISIONL FOREST OFFICER, AJMER

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in ITA no

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. Nos. 358 to 360/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2018-19 Income Tax Officer (TDS), Ajmer cuke Vs. Divisional Forest Officer Ajmer LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No. JDHD 02557 C vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Sunil Porwal (CA) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Sh. Anup Singh (Addl. CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing :

2. At the outset of the hearing, the Bench observed that there is a delay of 30 days in filing of the present appeal by the revenue. In support revenue filed a petition for condonation prayer dated 26.05.2023 sating that the delay was on account of the technical glitches as the order could not be seen in path of appeal