MANISH SHARMA,KOTA vs. JCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Date Of Hearing.

143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 dated31.10.2017. Hence the matter was referred to Joint Commissioner for imposition of penalty under section 271E of the IT Act, 1961. The JCIT issued show cause notice under section 271E of the IT Act, 1961 dated 08.02.2018 to the assessee to show cause as to why penalty under section 271E

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. M/S MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD., UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

MEWAR HOSPITAL PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

143(2) was issued in the case on 20.02.2019 which was duly served on the assessee on 20.02.2019. Mewar Hospital Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT 5. First we would like to take up year wise appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant facts in ITA No. 139/Jodh/2022 for A. Y. 2012- 13 is that based on the seized material

LAKHPAT TRADING AND INDUSTRYS PVT. LTD.,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blelakhpat Trading & Acit, Circle-3 Industryspvt. Ltd. Jodhpur G-72/73 79/80, 1St Phase, Boranada, Jodhpur - 342001 Pan No. Aaccl 5668 C Assessee By Shri Rajendra Jain, Advocate & Smt. Raksha Birla, Ca (Physical) Smt. Runi Pal, Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As Nfac/ Cit(A)] Dated 26.06.2025 With Respect To Assessment Year 2017-18 Challenging Therein The Rejection Of Its Books Of Accounts U/S 145(3), Estimation Of Income & Reducing Genuine Sales.

143(3). The principle of consistency required that the view taken by the Department in the preceding years should not be disturbed, unless there was a change in the factual and legal position." 11. There was no finding of the AO in the assessment order on discrepancy or adverse remark in maintenance of books of account and that

ANU SETIYA,SADULSHAHAR vs. ITO WARD - 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

TDS of Rs. 1,86,084/- claimed by the Appellant. 3. Being aggrieved by the order under section 143(1) of the Act, the Appellant

BOHAR SINGH,SRI KARANPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Narinder Kumar, Hon'Ble

TDS of Rs. 1,86,084/- claimed by the Appellant. 3. Being aggrieved by the order under section 143(1) of the Act, the Appellant

PREETI SINGHVI L/H SHRI AJAY SINGHVI,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

section 143(3), thereafter on the same facts, it was reopened by issuance of notice u/s 148 which was finalized, again notice u/s 148 is issued on the same facts and without any new material and finalized the reassessment which is for adjudication before this Hon’ble Tribunal. Now, this Hon’ble Tribunal is to decide the how prolong this

AJAYAB SINGH MUKHTYAR SINGH,PADAMPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

143(1) of\nthe Act, AO/CPC has accepted Returned income, but it has restricted the claim of\nTDS to Rs. 24,621/- as against Rs. 1,86,084/-. Thus disallowed the claim of TDS on\nthe ground that gross receipts as per form 26AS is more than that of what were\nshown in the ITR. This appears due to TDS

RAJTECH INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. ,PRATAPGARH. vs. ACIT, CIRCLE, CHITTORGARH

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 27.12.2016. The grounds of appeal are as under : “1. THE LD CIT APPEALS HAS ERRED IN DISALLOWING THE INTEREST PAID TO BANKING FINANCE COMPANIES ON THE GROUND OF NON TDS

ACIT, PAOTA C ROAD vs. VARAHA INFRA LIMITED, PAOTA B ROAD

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Dr. S. Seethalakshmi & Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhaithe Acit Vs M/S. Vardha Infra Ltd. Room No. 215, Aayakar Bhawan 6 Jalam Vilas Scheme Paota C Road, Jodhpur Paota B Road, Jodhpur (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccv 7972 K

3) of the Act. While holding so ld. AO also noted that in the immediately preceding i.e. A. Y. 2016-17 assessment was completed u/s 143(3) and on account of 52 Varaha Infra Ltd. assessee's failure to prove the authenticity of books of account, book results were rejected u/s 145(3) and NP rate of 7.23% was applied

DEEPAK KUMAR RAJORIA,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), BIKANER

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Assessing Authority Tax Was Paid & Adjust From Tds The Appellant Was Aware Of The Fact That There Is Any Form By Filing Which The Penalty May Be Dropped So The Penalty Was Never Leviable In This Case Therefore The Penalty U/S 270A May Please Be Cancelled. 3. The Appellant Prays For Justice & Relief. 4. The Appellant May Please Be Permitted To Raise Any Addition Or Alternative Ground At Or Before The Hearing.”

3) of section 143 or section 147, as the case may be, has been paid within the period specified in such notice of demand; and (b) no appeal has been filed The application has to be made in form No. 68 within 30 days from the end of the month in which the order has been received by the Assessee