ITAT Lucknow Judgments — May 2024

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the Assessing Officer, granting the assessee one more opportunity to present their case and reconcile the mismatch between Form-26AS and audited accounts. The assessee was cautioned to comply fully in the set-aside proceedings.

The Tribunal, noting the ex-parte dismissal by the NFAC and the lack of objection from the revenue, decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity to present their case. The appeal was restored to the NFAC for a fresh adjudication.

The Tribunal, acknowledging the non-compliance, decided to grant the assessee one more opportunity to present their case in the interest of substantial justice. The matter was restored to the Assessing Officer.

The Tribunal condoned a one-day delay in filing the appeal and restored the case to the Assessing Officer. The assessee was granted one more opportunity to present their case, with a caution for future compliance.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the case to the NFAC, granting the assessee one more opportunity to present their case. The assessee was cautioned to comply fully in the set-aside proceedings.

The Tribunal restored the appeal to the NFAC, granting the assessee one more opportunity to explain the delay and present their case on merits. The assessee was cautioned to comply with future directions.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal and restored the case to the Assessing Officer for adjudication on merits. The assessee was cautioned to comply with the AO's directions to avoid an ex-parte order.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, acknowledging the assessee's lack of computer knowledge. The case was restored to the Assessing Officer to provide the assessee one more opportunity to present their case.

The Tribunal, while noting the assessee's non-compliance, granted one more opportunity to present the case before the CIT(A) in the interest of substantial justice. The assessee was cautioned to comply fully in the set-aside proceedings.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the issues to the Assessing Officer for a de-novo assessment. This was to provide the assessee with a reasonable opportunity to present their case, especially concerning the alleged fraud.

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) violated Rule 46A by admitting additional evidence without giving the AO an opportunity to examine and rebut it, and without recording reasons for admission. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the application for withdrawal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the aforesaid appeals. Consequently, the seven appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Pr. CIT (Central), Kanpur for assessment years 2013-14 to 2019-20 were dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee has the right to withdraw their appeals, and the Tribunal will grant such permission, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. No issue was left undecided.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the application for withdrawal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the aforesaid appeals. Consequently, the seven appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Pr. CIT (Central), Kanpur for assessment years 2013-14 to 2019-20 were dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee has the right to withdraw their appeals, and the Tribunal will grant such permission, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. No issue was left undecided.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the application for withdrawal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the aforesaid appeals. Consequently, the seven appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Pr. CIT (Central), Kanpur for assessment years 2013-14 to 2019-20 were dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee has the right to withdraw their appeals, and the Tribunal will grant such permission, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. No issue was left undecided.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal permitted the assessee to withdraw all the appeals. Consequently, the appeals filed by the assessee were dismissed as withdrawn.

The Tribunal considered the application for withdrawal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the aforesaid appeals. Consequently, the seven appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Pr. CIT (Central), Kanpur for assessment years 2013-14 to 2019-20 were dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee has the right to withdraw their appeals, and the Tribunal will grant such permission, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. No issue was left undecided.

The Tribunal considered the application for withdrawal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the aforesaid appeals. Consequently, the seven appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Pr. CIT (Central), Kanpur for assessment years 2013-14 to 2019-20 were dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee has the right to withdraw their appeals, and the Tribunal will grant such permission, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. No issue was left undecided.

The Tribunal considered the application for withdrawal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the aforesaid appeals. Consequently, the seven appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Pr. CIT (Central), Kanpur for assessment years 2013-14 to 2019-20 were dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee has the right to withdraw their appeals, and the Tribunal will grant such permission, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. No issue was left undecided.

The Tribunal considered the application for withdrawal filed by the assessee. The Tribunal allowed the assessee to withdraw the aforesaid appeals. Consequently, the seven appeals filed by the assessee against the orders of the Pr. CIT (Central), Kanpur for assessment years 2013-14 to 2019-20 were dismissed as withdrawn. The ratio decidendi is that an assessee has the right to withdraw their appeals, and the Tribunal will grant such permission, leading to the dismissal of the appeals as withdrawn. No issue was left undecided.

The Tribunal decided to allow the appeal of the assessee, but only for statistical purposes. The specific grounds for this decision are not detailed in the provided text.