MAHENDRA RATHI,BIKANER vs. ITO, BIKANER

gains and interest, finding them to have merit.", "result": "Remanded", "sections": [ "148", "234A", "234B", "234C", "250", "2(14)(iii)" ], "issues": "Whether the ex parte order passed by NFAC was justified without proper service of notice. Whether the reopening of assessment under Section 148 was valid and whether capital

ASHOK PANWAR HUF,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assesses ITA No

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon'Ble

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [for brevity, the "Act"] for the Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2015-16, date of orders 20/12/2023 and 17/07/2023, respectively. The impugned orders emanated from the order of the Ld. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3, Jodhpur [for brevity, the "Ld. AO"] passed under section 143(3) of the Act, date of orders

RACHNA GOYAL,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(2), JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee\nhas raised the following grounds of appeal :-\n“1.The CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without\nconsidering the grounds of the assessee regarding reopening of assessment.\n2. The CIT (A) erred in dismissing the appeal of the assessee without\ndiscussing and considering

RAJ KUMAR GOLECHA,PALI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR, AAYKAR BHAWAN, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

section 250 of the I.T. Act, 1961,\nfor the assessment year 2014-15.\n2.\nThe assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :-\n1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) erred in\nconfirming the AO's order dated 28.12.2017 passed for the AY 2014-15 u/s\n153A r.w.s

MANGILAL DATLA,BANSWARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD BANSWARA, BANSWARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed, both on legal issue\nas well as on facts

gain, he cannot simply dispute fact that assessee did not file return—Entire\nreasoning recorded by AO for initiation of reassessment proceeding and issuance of notice\nunder section 148 was on wrong and incorrect facts that assessee has never filed return of\nincome, and in fact, it was filed—Initiation of reassessment proceeding u/s.147 and notice under\nsection

MARBLE KINGDOM INDIA PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO,WARD-TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteassessment Year : 2013-14 Marble Kingdom India Private Income Tax Officer, 365, Lodha Complex, Shashtri Vs Ward-Tds, Circle, Udaipur Udaipur Pan: Jdhm06807D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Ms. Prerana Choudhary-Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.08.2023 Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi) Under Section 250 Of Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y. 2013-14 Emanating From Order Under Section 154 Of The Income Tax Act Dated 31.12.2019 Passed By Income Tax Officer (Tds), Udaipur. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Application Under Section 154 Of The Act Against The Order Under Section 200A. Assessee Requested The Ito To Rectify The Levy Of Fee Charged Under Section 234E Of The Act. The Ld. Ito Rejected The Application On The Ground That It Is Not A Mistake Apparent From Record As It Is A Debatable Issue. The Relevant Paragraph Of The Order Is Reproduced Here As Under:- Marble Kingdom India Pvt. Ltd. “3. On-Going Through The Record It Is Noticed That It Is Not A Mistake Apparent On Record & Issue Is Debatable & Also Not Covered U/S 154 Of The Act. Thus The Contention Of The Deductor/Assessee Is Not Tenable Because The Hon'Ble Jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Has Dismissed The Appeals In The Case Of M/S Dundlod Shikdhan Sansthan & Anr. V/S Union Of India & Ors. In D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8672/2014 Dated 28.07.2015 On This Issue. Hence Considering The Facts Of The Case & Decision Of Jurisdictional Rajasthan High Court The Application Filed By The Assessee U/S 154 Is Rejected Accordingly.”

250 of the Act 1. 31.12.2020 06.01.2021 No Response 2. 09.07.2021 19.07.2021 No Response 3. 26.11.2021 13.12.2021 No Response 4. 07.01.2022 28.01.2022 No Response 5. 23.02.2022 09.03.2022 No Response 6.1 Thus, ld. CIT(A) had issued five notices and assessee failed to submit reply to the ld. CIT(A). Therefore, we are of the opinion that sufficient opportunity had been

NARAYANI BAI DANGI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.42/Jodh/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2016-17. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward 2(1), Udaipur,[in brevity ‘the AO’] order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following ground: I.T.A. No.42/Jodh/2022 2 Assessment Year

CHHITAR MAL JAIN ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in brevity the Act) for assessment year 2019-20. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the CPC, Bengaluru, (in brevity the ld. AO) order passed u/s 154/143(1) of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds: I.T.A. No. 113/Jodh/2022 2 Assessment Year

AMRINDER SINGH JOSAN,SRI GANGANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-3,, SRIGANGANAGAR

In the result, the appeal bearing ITA 492/Jodh/2023 is allowed for statistical purposes

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

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2011-12. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the Income Tax Officer, Ward -3, Sriganga Nagar,[in brevity ‘the AO’] order passed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following ground: I.T.A.No. 492/Jodh/2023 2 &S.A.No.10/Jodh/2023 “1. That

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

250 of the I.T.\nAct, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The\ngrounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under\n:-\n2\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14\n“Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDIAPUR, UDAIPUR

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

250 of the I.T. Act, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The grounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under :- Ashiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur. In ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14 “Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s 143(3) of the I.T. Act,1961 dated

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

250 of the I.T.\nAct, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The\ngrounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under\n:- \n2\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14\n“Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s

ASHIANA BUILDPROP PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT- CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 UDIAPUR, UDAIPUE

250 of the I.T.\nAct, 1961, for the assessment years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2016-17. The\ngrounds and revised grounds raised in these appeals are being reproduced as under\n:-2\nITA Nos. 706 to 709/Jodh/2024\nAshiana Buildprop Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur.\nIn ITA No. 706/Jodh/2024 A.Y. 2013-14\n“Ground No.1: The impugned order u/s 153A r.w.s

SHRINATH PRODUCTS,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, the appeal filed by the assesse is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripotem/S Shrinath Products Vs. Ito. Ward 1(1), A.M.Mehta & Co, Udaipur, 6-B, Bapu Bazar, Rajasthan. Udaipur.-313001, Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Aaqfs9840Q Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Nidhi Nair. Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 07.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)(Cit(A)-1,Udaipur Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax (Act), 1961. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

250 of the Income Tax (Act), 1961. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. 1. THAT IN THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES LEARNED INCOME TAX OFFICER HAS WRONGLY IMPOSED PENALTY U/S 271(1)(b) FOR Rs 10000/- Shrinath Products, Udaipur. 2. WITHOUT ANY DACIC THAT ASSESSMENT ORDER WAS PASSED U/S 144 NO NOTICE WAS SERVED

SHRI KHERAJ RAM ,BARMER vs. DC CEN CIR01, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity the Act] for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15. The impugned orders were emanated from the order of I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 114/Jodh/2023 2 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2014-15 the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur, (in brevity the AO) order passed

SHRI KHERAJ RAM ,BARMER vs. DC CEN CIR01, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity the Act] for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15. The impugned orders were emanated from the order of I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 114/Jodh/2023 2 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2014-15 the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur, (in brevity the AO) order passed

SHRI KHERAJ RAM ,BARMER vs. DC CEN CIR01, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity the Act] for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15. The impugned orders were emanated from the order of I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 114/Jodh/2023 2 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2014-15 the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur, (in brevity the AO) order passed

SHRI KHERAJ RAM ,BARMER vs. DC CEN CIR01, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity the Act] for A.Ys. 2011-12 to 2014-15. The impugned orders were emanated from the order of I.T.A. Nos. 111 to 114/Jodh/2023 2 Assessment Years: 2011-12 to 2014-15 the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Jodhpur, (in brevity the AO) order passed