KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 (w.e.f.\n1.4.1993).]\n(4)Where such discontinuance or dissolution takes place after any proceedings in respect\nof an assessment year have commenced, the proceedings may be continued against the\nperson referred to in sub-section (3) from the stage at which the proceedings stood at the\ntime of such discontinuance or dissolution, and all the provisions of this

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 (w.e.f.\n1.4.1993).]\n(4)Where such discontinuance or dissolution takes place after any proceedings in respect\nof an assessment year have commenced, the proceedings may be continued against the\nperson referred to in sub-section (3) from the stage at which the proceedings stood at the\ntime of such discontinuance or dissolution, and all the provisions of this

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 (w.e.f.\n1.4.1993).]\n(4)Where such discontinuance or dissolution takes place after any proceedings in respect\nof an assessment year have commenced, the proceedings may be continued against the\nperson referred to in sub-section (3) from the stage at which the proceedings stood at the\ntime of such discontinuance or dissolution, and all the provisions of this

KANAK KUMAR JAIN L/H OF PARTNER OF M/S. KESARIYAJI FILLING STATION,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

68 (w.e.f.\n1.4.1993).]\n(4)Where such discontinuance or dissolution takes place after any proceedings in respect\nof an assessment year have commenced, the proceedings may be continued against the\nperson referred to in sub-section (3) from the stage at which the proceedings stood at the\ntime of such discontinuance or dissolution, and all the provisions of this

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

LIFE CARE HOSPITAL,SIROHI vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIRCLE-1,, JODHPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :- 2 Life Care Hospital, Abu Road, Sirohi. 1. Your appellant is a partnership firm and having multispecialty hospital at Tatoli Road, Aburoad, Dist. Sirohi (Rajasthan). 2. Your appellant filed their Return of Income on 25.10.2017 declaring total income

M/S BHAGIRATH DAIRY PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGAUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,, NAGAUR

The appeal is allowed

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Sudhir Pareek, Hon’Ble

section 68 of the act and and added to the income of the assessee. In addition to the cash-credits, the AO has further made addition of Rs. 8,56,000/- u/s 69A of the by treating the deposit in the name of Sh. Mohan Ram Choudhary and Smt.Tulchi Devi

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

ACIT, CIRCLE, BHILWARA vs. M/S. PLAZA TEX (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,, BHILWARA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Girish Agrawal

68 is hereby deleted.” 5. Aggrieved by the relief granted by Ld. CIT(A), Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Before us, Ld. Sr. DR asserted that Ld. CIT(A) has granted the relief merely on the basis of documents furnished by the assessee. No exercise of any enquiry or verification has been undertaken either

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

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

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

RITU ROAD LINES,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-02, JODHPUR

Appeal of the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.34/Jodh/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ritu Road Lines, The Dcit, Plot No.12-14, Nakoda V Central Circle-2, Jodhpur. Industrial Area, Basni, S Jodhpur – 342001. Pan: Aaafr9440D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee By Shri Amit Kothari – Ar Revenue By Smt. Alka Rajvanshi Jain – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 16/08/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08/11/2023

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2018-19 dated 29.12.2022 emanating from assessment order under section 143(3) r.w.s 153B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 31.12.2019. The grounds of appeal are as under : “1. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order passed by Id. AO u/sl43(3) without appreciating the facts of the case

SANTOSH SHARMA,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JODHPUR

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

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Moved A Condonation Petition Explaining That The Delay Was Caused Due To Non-Receipt Of Communication From The Earlier Representative, Who Neither Apprised The Assessee Of The Appellate Outcome Nor Advised Timely Remedial Action. It Has Been Further Submitted That Upon Obtaining Knowledge Of The Order, The Assessee Promptly Engaged New Counsel & Has Been Diligently Pursuing The Matter. A Prayer Was Made To Condone The Delay In The Interest Of Justice.

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2012–13, whereby various additions made under section 68 of the Act were sustained. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 217 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has moved a condonation petition explaining that the delay

CREATIVE PROPMART PVT. LTD. ,UDAIPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), UDAIPUR

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

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

section 250 of the Act that date and place of hearing was duly fixed. The assessee was also given notice along with notice to the Assessing Officer. The assessee had ample opportunity to make his submissions by appearing in person or through authorised representative. Despite fixing the case for seventeen hearings, no one had put in appearance

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:-

250 of IT Act were issued to the appellant through ITBA(A), which amounts to service of notice as provided under Section 280 of the Act. However, there has been no 4 response of the appellant. Accordingly, he held that in view of the aforesaid non-compliance on the part of the appellant, instant appeal is adjudicated

DR. MANISH CHHAPARWAL ,UDAIPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

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

250 of the IT Act, 1961 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Udaipur is bad in law, illegal and void. 2. The ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Udaipur has erred in affirming the order of Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Udaipur in making addition of Rs.19,50,000/- on account