SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance made on hypothetical way which is against the principle of natural justice. Therefore I humbly request kindly allow deduction

SAMPAT LAL LODHA ,NATHDWARA vs. ITO, WARD-2, RAJSAMAND

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

disallowance made on hypothetical way which is against the principle of natural justice. Therefore I humbly request kindly allow deduction

SMT. PUSHPA CHHAJER,JODHPUR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowing purchase without considering real & true fact in right perspective and judicious manner. 11. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the authority below grossly erred in making attempt to normal business transaction as something unusual and out of the ordinary only as un-discerningiy which is against the principal of natural justice

M/S. KHADI GRAMMODHYOG PRATISTHAN,BIKANER vs. ADIT, CPC / ITO, WARD-1(2), BANGALURU / BIKANER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

disallowance made by the assessing officer is confirm arbitrary and against the law and against the natural justice therefore liable

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.”

nature. In the light of accordance with the law. Similar view is taken by the coordinate Bench in the case of Madhya Pradesh Gramin Bank vs. ACIT (supra) wherein in para 9 and 10 the Coordinate Bench has observed as under:- “9. We have considered the rival submissions of both sides and also perused the record. We would observe

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.

justice because as admittedly the third party information as provided by other officer had been blindly accepted as genuine by ld AO without any examination by way of carrying out any investigation and verifications of facts and rebuttal of the alleged information to the assessee and thus, the documentary evidences and explanation as provided by assessee in support of genuineness

SHRI SHESHAVTAR 1008 SHRI KALLAJI VEDPITH EVAM SHODH SANSTHAN,NIMBAHERA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, UDAIPUR, AAYKAR BHAWAN, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

disallowing the legal and legitimate claim of the assessee only for the reason that it is being claimed during the assessment. Which is quite arbitrary, unjustified and against the law of natural justice

ARAVALI TRADING COMPANY,NAGAUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, NAGAUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatshri Manish Boradaravali Trading Company, Vs Ito, 154, Near Bus Stand, Ward-1, Nagour Merta City, Nagaur, (Rajasthan) Rajasthan-341510 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabfa7735M Assessee By Shri Kishan Goyal, Ca Revenue By Shri S.M.Joshi, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 20/03/2023 Date Of 21/03/2023 Pronouncement

natural justice under the facts & circumstances of the case. 6. ADDITION ON A/C OF RATE DIFFERACE Rs. 50,000/- a. That Authorities below erred in law and in facts while making addition on account of rate difference of Rs. 50,000/.. b. That Authorities below has seriously erred in law and in facts while making pure presumptive addition on account

SUNIL AND COMPANY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

natural justice. 3. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition for notional interest of Rs. 9,36,505/- on advances given on which interest was already charged. The Id. CIT(A) has erred in estimating notional interest @12% on such advances while the actual interest was at 10% and 9%. 4. The Id. CIT(A) has erred

R.K. CARRIERS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,UDAIPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteassessment Year : 2014-15 R.K. Carriers India Private The Acit, Limited, 4 Laxmi Nagar, Subcity V Circle-1, Centre Chouraha, Sector No. 8, S Udaipur (Raj.) Hiran Magri, Udaipur (Raj.)- 313001 Pan: Aadcr8681E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Ms. Nidhi Nair, Jcit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09/08/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Delhi Dated 29.08.2022 Emanating From The Order Under Section 143(3) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Passed By Acit, Circle-1, Udaipur For The A.Y.2014-15. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. That The Ld. Cit (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi Has Grossly Erred In Facts & In Law In Confirming The Disallowance Of Rs. 308827.00 Made On Account Of Delayed Statutory Payment Of Employee Contribution Of Pf As Per The Provisions Of Section 36(1)(Va) Of The It Act, 1961 As Per His Convenience. Therefore, The Action Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi Is Unwarranted, Against The Principles Of Natural Justice, Illegal & Unjustified & The Disallowance So Made & Confirmed By The Ld. Cit (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi Is Bad In Law & Liable To Be Deleted. R.K. Carriers India Private Ltd. 2. That The Appellant Reserves His Rights To Add, To Alter Or To Modify Any Grounds Of The Appeal On Or Before Hearing Of The Same.”

disallowance of Rs. 308827.00 made on account of delayed statutory payment of employee contribution of PF as per the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the IT Act, 1961 as per his convenience. Therefore, the action of the Ld. CIT (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi is unwarranted, against the principles of natural justice

M/S. SWASTIK GAUR GUM INDUSTRIES ,CHURU vs. ITO, WARD-2, CHURU

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

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

disallowances. We considering the overall facts, turnover and nature of business of the assessee and to meet the ends of justice

M/S. SWASTIK GAUR GUM INDUSTRIES ,CHURU vs. ITO, WARD-2, CHURU

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

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

disallowances. We considering the overall facts, turnover and nature of business of the assessee and to meet the ends of justice

M/S. SWASTIK GAUR GUM INDUSTRIES ,CHURU vs. ITO, WARD-2, CHURU

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

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

disallowances. We considering the overall facts, turnover and nature of business of the assessee and to meet the ends of justice

HARISH GAURAV,UDAIPUR vs. ADIT, CPC, / ACIT, C-2,, BENGALURU / UDAIPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Bleharish Gaurav Adit Cpc C/O Satyam Svg & Co 15-18, Bengaluru - 342006 Diamond Plazza, Hiran Magari Sect 5, Udaipur (Raj) - 313001 Pan No. Adhpg 1265 F Assessee By Shri Yogesh Pokharna, C.A. (Physical) Shri K.C. Meena, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 13.01.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 28.01.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: The Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Addl/Jcit (A)-1 Pune [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Jcit Appeal”] Dated 15.02.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2021-22 Challenging Therein Rejection Of Appeal For The Delay Of 63 Days By The Ld. Cit(A) In Violation Of Principles Of Natural Justice & In Deciding The Issue Of Disallowance Of Exemption/Deduction Claimed U/S 80Ia Of The Act On Merits Of The Case.

natural justice and in deciding the issue of disallowance of exemption/deduction claimed u/s 80IA of the Act on merits of the case

RAMDEO PAN BHANDAR,BIKANER vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, BIKANER

In the result, the appeal filed by the asessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteram Deo Pan Bhandar Vs. Acit, Circle -1, Kem Road, Bikaner, Bikaner-334001, Rajasthan. Rajasthan. Pan/Gir No. : Aabfr3308M Appellant .. Respondent Assessee By : Shri Amit Kothari, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Prerana Choudhary, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing 16.08.2023 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 National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

disallowance of expenditure of Rs.1,83,775/- which is in the nature of discount charges allowed to the customers. The Ld. AR submitted that though the head of expenditure which was claimed by the assessee is different but the assessee has provided the discount to various parties in respect of the sales and the Ld. AR demonstrated the ledger account

VINAY MITTAL,SRIGANGANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, SRIGANGANAGAR

The appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Blevinay Mittal Income Tax Officer, 3, J Block, Sriganganagar (Raj.) Ward No. -1, Ward No. 1 Keshrisinghpur Sriganganagar Sriganganagar Pan No. Avopm6894P Assessee By Shri Virendra Jain, Advocate (Physical) Revenue By Shri P.M. Mirdha, Addl. Cit- Dr (Virtual) Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As The Nfac/ Cit (A)] Dated 22.03.2024 With Respect To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. The Appellant Assessee Has Taken Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

justice and relief. 7. The appellant crave liberty to add, amend, alter or modify any of the ground of appeal on or before its hearing before your honours. 3. First we take up the issue challenged by the Assessee as regards to the confirmation of addition of Rs. 1,20,55,195/- on account of rebate expenditure against commission income

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHILWARA, SHASTRI NAGAR vs. DHIKOLA GRAM SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LTD., DHIKOLA, SHAHPURA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Bleincome Tax Officer, Ward – 1 Dhikola Gram Sewa Sahkari Bhilwara Samiti Ltd. Kawa Kheda Chouraha, Shastri Nagar, Bhilwara - 311001 Assessee By Shri Sunil Porwal, Ca (Virtual) Shri P.R. Mirdha, Addl. Cit-Dr (Virtual) Revenue By Date Of Hearing 18.02.2026. Date Of Pronouncement 26.02.2026. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.:

disallowance of deduction u/s 80P of the Act no details were provided by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings. The DR argued that in the present case, the assessment order has been passed ex-parte qua the assessee by the AO due to non-compliance on the part of the assessee to the notice issued

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

natural justice, making the orders null and void.\n5. The notices issued and order passed is without authentication and is void.\nAs per section 282A:\n(1) Where this Act requires a notice or other document to be issued by any income-tax\nauthority, such notice or other document shall be signed and issued in paper form or\ncommunicated