SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS , UDAIPU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

condonation of delay with following prayers and the assessee to this effect also filed an affidavit :- “1. In this connection it is submitted that the applicant is a regular IT assessee. In this case the TDS

SARDA DEVI CHECHANI,UDAIPUR vs. ITO TDS, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

condonation of delay with following prayers and the assessee to this effect also filed an affidavit :- “1. In this connection it is submitted that the applicant is a regular IT assessee. In this case the TDS

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)

TDS is liable to be deducted. Therefore, disallowance of interest paid of Rs.4,46,546/- is bad in law and against the principles of natural justice. 3 The Ld. AO has erred in disallowing the 100% of expense which is bad in law and against the principles of natural justice. 4 The appellant pray for suitable costs. 3. Briefly

DINESH INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

delay thereafter cannot be condoned without there being compelling grounds as advocated by the Hon'ble Courts. 7.24 These submissions were carefully considered. Dinesh Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The appellant has contended that CPC has erred in charging late fees amounting to Rs. 38,200/- U/s. 234E. In support of his contention, he has quoted various decisions such

DINESH INFRASTRURCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

delay thereafter cannot be condoned without there being compelling grounds as advocated by the Hon'ble Courts. 7.24 These submissions were carefully considered. Dinesh Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The appellant has contended that CPC has erred in charging late fees amounting to Rs. 38,200/- U/s. 234E. In support of his contention, he has quoted various decisions such

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

DIDWANA VIKASH PARISHAD SAMITI, ,DIDWANA, NAGAUR. vs. AO,NFAC, JODHPUR, JODHPUR

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

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

delay of 23 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. The appellate order, passed by Id. Commissioner of Income Tax/NFAC on 29.12.2023, online mode, came to the notice only in the month of March, when online verification of 26AS was being made to verify the TDS deduction that certain orders had been made

KAUSHALIYA DEVI DHOOT,JODHPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-3, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

TDS Credit of Rs. 46,662/- in the computation of income. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused material on record. From the impugned order, it is seen that the learned JCIT (A) rejected the appeal qua the assessee by observing vide para5, as under: 5. Decision: I have carefully considered the appellate documents, submissions filed, and order

KRISHAN LAL OM PRAKASH,PADAMPUR vs. ITO WARD 1, SRI GANGANAGAR

Appeal of the assesse is allowed in the manner discussed as above

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon'Ble & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon'Blekrishan Lal Om Prakash Shop No. 48, Nai Dhan Mandi, Padampur - 335041. Pan No. Aabfk1565H Assessee By Revenue By Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement

TDS on transaction receipts as Kaccha Arahtia. 2. There is a delay of 54 days in filing the appeal. The Ld. AR explained that the short delay because of compilation of document and error in uploading on ITBA portal may be condoned