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

delay in filling these three appeals by the assessee.\n6.\nBefore we take up these appeals on its merits, after condoning the\ndelay, the Id. AR of the assessee submitted that the matter in ITA No.\n1007/JP/2025 for A.Y 2017-18 may be taken as the lead case for\ndiscussions, and on this aspect of the matter

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

c) of the Act. Assessee in support of his claim along with condonation delay application also provided the affidavit as per the law, It is further submitted that even if ld. CIT(A) was not satisfied with the reasons provided by the assessee, ld. CIT(A) could have asked assessee to furnish other evidences in support of his claim. However

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

C-Deductions in respect of certain incomes.\"\r\nno such deduction shall be allowed to him unless he furnishes a return of this\r\nincome for such assessment year on or before the due date specified under\r\nsub-section (1) of Section 139.]\"\r\nOn a perusal of the aforesaid statutory provision, it transpires that sub-section

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

2,22,704/- under section 80P of the\nAct. The issue for consideration before us is that whether once the\nreturn of income is filed beyond the prescribed date under section\n139(1) of the Act, can the deduction under section 80P of the Act be\ndenied to the assessee, by way of adjustment under section 143(1) of\nthe

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

SUPERFINE HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6,, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

condone the delay of 58 days in filing the\nappeal before us.\n4.\nThe brief facts of the case are that the assessee the assessee is a\ncompany engaged in hotel business. The assessee filed its return of\nincome on 30.09.2015 declaring loss of Rs. (-) 15,24,86,880/-. A search\nwas conducted on 30.10.2014 in the case

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

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

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\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\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\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

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 :

condone the delay. Income Tax Officer (TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer 3. Admitting the appeal of the revenue moving further on merits, the ld. DR submitted that the matter pertaining to Divisional Forest Officer, Ajmer in ITA no. 358/JP/2023 may be taken as a lead case for discussions as the issues involved in the lead case are common and inextricably

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 :

condone the delay. Income Tax Officer (TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer 3. Admitting the appeal of the revenue moving further on merits, the ld. DR submitted that the matter pertaining to Divisional Forest Officer, Ajmer in ITA no. 358/JP/2023 may be taken as a lead case for discussions as the issues involved in the lead case are common and inextricably

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 :

condone the delay. Income Tax Officer (TDS) vs. Divisional Forest Officer 3. Admitting the appeal of the revenue moving further on merits, the ld. DR submitted that the matter pertaining to Divisional Forest Officer, Ajmer in ITA no. 358/JP/2023 may be taken as a lead case for discussions as the issues involved in the lead case are common and inextricably

DAUSA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DAUSA vs. ITO WD 1, BHARATPUR

In the result both the appeals of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with a amounting of Rs

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by AO, such confirmation being illogical as well as irrelevant hence deserves to be set aside. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) and AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, same being unlawful

DAUSA CENTRAL COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,DAUSA vs. ITO WD 1, BHARATPUR

In the result both the appeals of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes with a amounting of Rs

Bench: Shri Gagan Goyal & Shri Narinder Kumar

section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by AO, such confirmation being illogical as well as irrelevant hence deserves to be set aside. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law Ld. CIT(A) and AO has erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, same being unlawful