UMRAV SINGH,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

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

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

condoning the delay in filing of appeal by the Appellant. 6. That, the humble Appellant may be allowed to add, amend or delete any grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, Sh. Umrav Singh, had sold an immovable property during the relevant year

LAXMAN SINGH SOLANKI (FIRM),PALI vs. ITO, , PALI

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

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), DR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member)

section 147 r.w.s. 144/144B on 27.03.2022 determining income at Rs.1,03,78,887/- by disallowing the said expenses. 4. Against the order of the Ld. AO The appeal before the CIT(A) was filed with a delay of 129 days, supported by an affidavit of Shri Dinesh Singh Solanki, partner of the firm, stating that due to his prolonged illness

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 appeal before the CIT/NFAC against the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144/144B exparte qua the assessee. The Ld. AR argued that the worthy CIT(A)/NFAC rejected the appeal as inadmissible without granting opportunity of the hearing against the ex parte assessment order passed under section 147/144 of the act and that while rejecting the condonation

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 appeal before the CIT/NFAC against the assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144/144B exparte qua the assessee. The Ld. AR argued that the worthy CIT(A)/NFAC rejected the appeal as inadmissible without granting opportunity of the hearing against the ex parte assessment order passed under section 147/144 of the act and that while rejecting the condonation

KAILASH CHANDRA MOONDRA ,SUMERPUR vs. ITO,, SUMERPUR

In the result, ITA No. 334/Jodh/2019 is allowed for statistical purpose and

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

delay for 240 days of the assessee is duly condoned. 3. In the outset, one appeal of the assessee is filed against the appeal order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Act and another appeal against the order which was passed u/s 154 related to rectification of the main appeal order for the impugned assessment year. The issue of both

KAILASH CHANDRA MOONDRA ,SUMERPUR vs. ITO,, SUMERPUR

In the result, ITA No. 334/Jodh/2019 is allowed for statistical purpose and

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

delay for 240 days of the assessee is duly condoned. 3. In the outset, one appeal of the assessee is filed against the appeal order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Act and another appeal against the order which was passed u/s 154 related to rectification of the main appeal order for the impugned assessment year. The issue of both

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

RAMESHWAR SONI,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

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

147 of the Act, date of order 29/03/2022 for\nA.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16 and A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18 date of order 30/03/2022;\nfor A.Y. 2018-19 date of order 29/03/2023; and A.Y. 2019-20 date of order\n30/09/2021, order passed under section 143(3) of the Act.\n2. All the appeals carry same nature of facts and have

MOHAMMAD YASEER,BARDEZ GOA vs. ITO, WARD-2, MAKRANA

In the result, all the appeals bearing ITAs No

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

Section under which date order is passed & dt of order 345/Jodh/2024 2015-16 28/03/2023 ITO, Ward 2, U/s 143(3), DO Makrana. 29/12/2017 501/Jodh/2024 2015-16 30/11/2023 Assessment Unit, U/s 147 r.w.s. 144 Income-tax r.w.s.144B, DO Department 14/03/2023 503/Jodh/2024 2015-16 19/04/2024 NFAC U/s 144 r.w.s 263 r.w.s. 144B, DO 13/09/2021 514/Jodh/2024 2015-16 15/12/2023 ITO, Ward 2, Churu

RAMESHWAR SONI,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: the Ld.CIT(A). But due to illness, the assessee was unable to comprehend that the notices of hearing on different dates were issued by the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal order was passed exparte and the impugned additions were confirmed. Aggrieved assessee filed an

147 of the Act, date of order 29/03/2022 for A.Ys. 2014-15, 2015-16 and A.Ys. 2016-17 & 2017-18 date of order 30/03/2022; for A.Y. 2018-19 date of order 29/03/2023; and A.Y. 2019-20 date of order 30/09/2021, order passed under section 143(3) of the Act. 2. All the appeals carry same nature of facts and have

MAHENDRA RATHI,BIKANER vs. ITO, BIKANER

delay in filing appeal is condoned and\nappeal admitted.\n3. Having heard both the sides and perusal of material on record, we find\nthat the Ld. NFAC has rejected the appeal ex parte qua the assessee summarily\nby a non-speaking appeal order without mentioning the factum of service of\nnotices of hearing issued