KEWAL KANWAR BHANDARI ,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JODHPUR

Appeal is hereby dismissed

Bench: Learned Cit(A). Vide Impugned Order, Learned Cit(A) Has Upheld The Penalty Order, By Observing In The Manner As Under:-

condoned the delay in filing of the appeal, penalty order deserved to be set aside on the very grounds put forth

SEEMA PANDIT,MOUNT AU vs. ITO, WARD, MOUNT ABU

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

Bench: The Cit(A) To Rectify The Order. The Cit(A) Has Rejected The Application U/S 154 Vide Order Dated 29.3.2019 & Served The Order On The Assessee On 19.4.2019. After Rejection Of His Application U/S 154, The Assessee Has Immediately Filed This Appeal Before The Hon'Ble Tribunal..

condonation of delay before the CIT(A) on the ground of illness of her husband and bad condition faced by her family. (ii). As the assessee could not attend the hearing before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay as well as for non- prosecution. (iii). The assessee is a primary school teacher

SUSHIL KUMAR MARLECHA,PALI vs. DEPUTY/ASSTT, CIT (CPC-TDS) / ITO, TDS-1,, GHAZIABAD / JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

condonation of delay.” 5. As the assessee did not receive any favor from the appeal filed before ld. NFAC/ CIT(A). The present appeal filed against the said order of the ld. NFAC dated 11.08.2022 before this tribunal on the grounds as reiterated in para 2 above. To support the grounds so raised the ld. AR appearing on behalf

JANAK SINGH BHATI,JAISALMER vs. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, FACELESSS ASSESSMENT UNIT

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assesses are allowed for

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon'Ble

delay in filing of appeal before CIT(A) dealt by qualify for condonation. 6. In view of the principles of natural justice, the authorities below ought to have disproved the claim of the assessee by way of rebutting its contention of the assessee with support of corroborative documentary evidence on record after granting an adequate opportunity of being heard

JANAK SINGH BHATI,JAISALMER vs. LD. ASSESSING OFFICER, FACELESS ASSESSMENT UNIT

In the result, both the captioned appeals of the assesses are allowed for

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, Hon'Ble

delay in filing of appeal before CIT(A) dealt by qualify for condonation. 6. In view of the principles of natural justice, the authorities below ought to have disproved the claim of the assessee by way of rebutting its contention of the assessee with support of corroborative documentary evidence on record after granting an adequate opportunity of being heard

RAMAN LAL SHARMA,RAJSAMAND vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

delay of 198 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Rama lal Sharma vs. JCIT Collector, land Acquisition vs. MSt. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. The grounds urged

RAMAN LAL SHARMA,RAJSAMAND vs. JCIT, RANGE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Dr. S. Seethalakshmi

delay of 198 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Rama lal Sharma vs. JCIT Collector, land Acquisition vs. MSt. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 5. The grounds urged

SMT. JAYA MOGRA,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

penalty of Rs. 7,29,100/-.” 3. At the outset of hearing, the Bench observed that there is delay of 20 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation

JAI PRAKASH SUWALKA,UDAIPUR vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE-TDS, UDAIPUR

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

delay of 02 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 of appeal:- “1. That

RAJESH KALRA,HANUMANGARH TOWN vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, BIKANER

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoterajesh Kalra, Vs. Dcit, Circle – 1, Prop. M/S. Zodiac Bikaner – 334001, Imaging & Diagnostic Rajasthan. Centre, Hanumangarh -335513, Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Akapk9599E Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Prerana Choudhary, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 17.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 17.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Cit(A) & Passed U/S 271(1)(C) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

condone the delay and admit the appeal. The assessee has filed the appeal challenging the levy of penalty U/sec271(1)(C) of the Act. 3. The brief

RAHUL JOSHI,BIKANER vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), BIKANER

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, HonʼBle & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Ble

penalty proceedings, the assesse has noticed an ambiguity in the order and immediately filed the appeal with an application for condoning the delay

ACIT, CIRCLE (EXEMPTION), , JODHPUR vs. PALI TEXTILE COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT, PALI

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income-tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, the benefit

PALI TEXTILE COMMON EFFLUENT TREATMENT PLANT,PALI vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, JAIPUR

In the result the appeal of the revenue in ITA No

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. 8.3 In order to provide relief to such trusts and remove hardship in genuine cases, section 12A of the Income-tax Act has been amended to provide that in a case where a trust or institution has been granted registration under section 12AA of the Income-tax Act, the benefit

BHARAT CHATURBHUJ VEDANT,MUMBAI vs. DC, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: BEFOREDR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

penalty notice uploaded on the site on 15/05/2024. The assessee submits that the delay was unintentional and, therefore, the same may be condoned

BHARAT CHATURBHUJ VEDANT,MUMBAI vs. DC, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

Bench: BEFOREDR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

penalty notice uploaded on the site on 15/05/2024. The assessee submits that the delay was unintentional and, therefore, the same may be condoned

NAVPARGANA RAJPUROHIT SAMAJ BHAMDHAM TRUST KALANDRI,SIROHI vs. ITO, WARD EXEMPTION, JDOHPUR

Appeal are hereby dismissed

Bench: Cit(A). Consequently, Learned Cit(A) Dismissed Both Appeals Being Not Maintainable.

penalty orders passed u/s 270A of the Act. 7. So far as grant of liberty to file appeal is concerned, every appeal is to be filed before the competent authority in accordance with law. However, at the most, we may observe that in case any appeal is filed by the assessee before Learned CIT(A), against the concerned impugned orders

NAVPARGANA RAJPUROHIT SAMAJ BHAMDHAM TRUST KALANDRI,SIROHI vs. ITO, WARD EXEMPTION, JODHPUR

Appeal are hereby dismissed

Bench: Cit(A). Consequently, Learned Cit(A) Dismissed Both Appeals Being Not Maintainable.

penalty orders passed u/s 270A of the Act. 7. So far as grant of liberty to file appeal is concerned, every appeal is to be filed before the competent authority in accordance with law. However, at the most, we may observe that in case any appeal is filed by the assessee before Learned CIT(A), against the concerned impugned orders