MADHAV JEWELLERS,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1)(2), RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

192 days, hence, it should not be delay, on the part of the assessee. Learned Counsel further submitted that now the assessee wants to submit additional evidences and documents before the lower authorities, therefore, the appeal of the assessee may be restored back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 4. On the other hand, the Ld.DR

MADHAV JEWELLERS,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1)(2), RAJKOT

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

192 days, hence, it should not be delay, on the part of the assessee. Learned Counsel further submitted that now the assessee wants to submit additional evidences and documents before the lower authorities, therefore, the appeal of the assessee may be restored back to the file of the assessing officer for fresh adjudication. 4. On the other hand, the Ld.DR

M/S RUDRAKSH DETERGENT & CHEMICAL PVT. LTD.,,GANDHIDHAM vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMR. INCOME TAX, GANDHIDHAM CIRCLE,, GANDHIDHAM

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 154 of the Act, which caused delay in filing the appeal. The learned AR in support of his contention also filed the affidavit of the director of the assessee company which is placed on record. Accordingly the learned AR prayed before us for the condonation of the delay. 5. On the other hand, the learned DR considering the reasons