GAYATRI SHIKSHA NYAS,AGRA vs. ITO(EXEMPTION), AGRA, AGRA

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

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

11(1)(d) of the Act or section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act. Therefore, it is not a mistake apparent from record and not convinced with the submission, he rejected the condonation of delay

SARIF,JALESAR ETAH vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD-4(3)(1) , ETAH

In the result, both the appeals ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

11. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. v. Jahangir Byramji Jeejeebhoy (D), 2024 SCC online SC 489, has observed that the question of limitation is not merely a technical consideration. The rules of limitation are based on the principles of sound public policy and principles of equity, that the length of delay is a relevant matter, which

SARIF,JALESAR, ETAH vs. ASSESSIN OFFICER, WARD-4(3)(1), DINESH NAGAR ETAH

In the result, both the appeals ITA Nos

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

11. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union of India & Anr. v. Jahangir Byramji Jeejeebhoy (D), 2024 SCC online SC 489, has observed that the question of limitation is not merely a technical consideration. The rules of limitation are based on the principles of sound public policy and principles of equity, that the length of delay is a relevant matter, which

AASTITVA JAIN FAMILY TRUST,ASHOKNAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2015-16

11. That the delay in filing of appeal is unintentional and bonafied and there was no benefit to the appellant assessee trust in delay in filing of appeal. Thus the assessee trust was prevented from sufficient cause." 4.3. Assessee also submitted before the ld. CIT(Appeals) that the assessee received recovery of demand notice from department, and then only came

MAYA SHIKSHAN PASHISHAN SANSTHAN,HATHRAS vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD-4(3)(4), HATHRAS

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2018-19

section 249(2) of the Act and the order was passed on merit. The law on the subject is well settled that unless the delay is condoned, the appeal does not come into existence legally, and in such absence, the court is wholly without jurisdiction to hear or decide the same on merit. 9. Hon’ble Supreme Court in Union

LD SARVODAYA HOSPITAL PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. ITO 2(1)(1), AGRA

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

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhld Sarvodaya Hospital Private Limited, Vs. Ito 2(1)(1), G – 11, Kamla Nagar, Agra. Agra – 282 005 (Uttar Pradesh). (Pan : Aaccl7961N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.10.2025 Date Of Order : 28.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [“Ld. Cit(A)”, For Short] Dated 14.10.2024 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. We Are Proceeding To Decide The Appeal With The Assistance Of The Ld. Dr Of The Revenue. 3. At The Time Of Hearing, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 208 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal On The Ground That The Managing

11, Kamla Nagar, Agra. Agra – 282 005 (Uttar Pradesh). (PAN : AACCL7961N) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : None REVENUE BY : Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 14.10.2025 Date of Order : 28.10.2025 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : 1. The assessee has filed appeal against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1) , GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

1)(c ) of the Act, the same analogy could be drawn for the penalty under section 270A of the Act also. 11. In view of our aforesaid observations, we direct the Learned AO to cancel the levy of penalty under section 270A of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The grounds raised by the assessee are hereby allowed

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

1)(c ) of the Act, the same analogy could be drawn for the penalty under section 270A of the Act also. 11. In view of our aforesaid observations, we direct the Learned AO to cancel the levy of penalty under section 270A of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The grounds raised by the assessee are hereby allowed

VECTUS INDUSTRIES LTD.,GWALIOR vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

1)(c ) of the Act, the same analogy could be drawn for the penalty under section 270A of the Act also. 11. In view of our aforesaid observations, we direct the Learned AO to cancel the levy of penalty under section 270A of the Act for the Assessment Year 2017-18. The grounds raised by the assessee are hereby allowed

ANKITA PALIWAL,ALIGARH, UTTAR PRADESH vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, ALIGARH

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2018-19

condoned by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and, it was held by learned CIT(A) that the assessee cannot be granted foreign 3 | P a g e tax credit (FTC) . Thus, the appeal of the assessee stood dismissed by the ld. CIT(Appeals). 5. Still aggrieved, the assessee has filed appeal with the Tribunal, and the ld. Counsel for the assessee

YOGENDRA SINGH,FATEHGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(2)(1), FARRUKHABAD

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshyogendra Singh, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Nekpur Kalan Fatehgarh, Ward-4(2)(1), Farrukhabad, Up Farrukhabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Eqrps5224K Assessee By : Shri Rajendra Sharma, Adv Shri Manuj Sharma, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026

D E R 1. The appeal in ITA No. 524/AGR/2025 for AY 2017-18, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 17.06.2025 against the order of assessment passed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated

PRASHANT GUPTA L/H OF LATE SURENDRA KUMAR GUPTA,FARRUKHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(2)(2), FARRUKHABAD

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Prashant Gupta Vs. Ito, Legal Heir Of Late Ward-4(2)(2), Surendra Kumar Farrukhabad Gupta, Bajariya Brandavan, Kamganj, Farrukhabad, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Bcwpg7301M Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 17/09/2025

D E R 1. The appeal in ITA No. 59/AGR/2025 for AY 2017-18, arises out of the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. NFAC’, in short] dated 07.11.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated

SH RANJEET KUMAR SHARMA ,GWALIOR vs. ITO 2(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed with the observations made herein above

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalito, 2(1), Shri Ranjeet Kumar Gawalior. Sharma, Vs. Meera Colony, Bihind-477447 Madhya Pradesh. Pan-Bwdps0542K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajendra Sharma, Adv. & Shri Manuj Sharma, Adv. Department By Shri Shailendra Srivastava. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/05/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24/06/2025

D E R [ PER MANISH AGARWAL, AM: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [ CIT(A), in short] dated 23.01.2024, in Appeal No. CIT(A), Gwalior/10914/2019-20 for Assessment Year 2017-18 arising out of the order passed

JAHNVI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,AGRA vs. ITO, WARD EXEMTION, AGRA RCC, AGRA

The appeal stand allowed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No.141/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22) M/S Jahnvi Educational Trust Ito (Exemption) बनाम/ Vs. 130, Sector-9, Avas Vikas Colony Aaykar Bhawan Mg Road Sikandra Up – 282007 Sanjay Placed, Agra "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aabtj-1711-A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Rajesh Malhotra (Ca) - Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Shailendra Shrivastava – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 28-03-2025

D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2021-22 arises out of an order of learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Vadodara [CIT(A)] dated 05-02-2024 in the matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s 143(1) on 20-09-2022. Having heard rival submissions

MITHLA YADAV L/H OF LATE GYAN SINGH YADAV,GWALIOR vs. ITO 3(1), GWALIOR

Appeal stand dismissed in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं. / Ita No. 412/Agr/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2011-12) Smt. Mithla Yadav Income-Tax Officer, बनाम/ (L/H Of Late Shri Gyan Singh Yadav) Ward 3(1), Gwalior. 67, Kaulonipura, Vs. Preetam Singh Ghas Mandi, Gwalior. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Afbpy-6128-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Sh. Shailender Shrivastava, - Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-02-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 22.04.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. The Appellant Herein Smt. Mithla Yadav Has Filed The Instant Appeal Against An Order Of Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 21-06-2023 Confirming Assessment Order Dated 19-11-2018 As Passed By Ld. Ao Assessing Total Income Of Rs.107.01 Lacs. The Registry Has Noted Delay Of 31 Days In The Appeal Which Stand Condoned. 2. It Emerges During The Course Of Hearing By Revenue That The Appellant Smt. Mithla Yadav Has Claimed Herself To Be The Legal Representative Of The Deceased Late Shri Gyan Singh Yadav Who Is Stated To Have Left For His Heavenly Abode. The Ld. Sr. Dr Submits That Neither She Has Proved Herself As The Legal Representative As Per Section 2(29) Of Income Tax Act R.W.S 2(11) Of Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 Nor

D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. The appellant herein Smt. Mithla Yadav has filed the instant appeal against an order of Ld. CIT(A), NFAC dated 21-06-2023 confirming assessment order dated 19-11-2018 as passed by Ld. AO assessing total income of Rs.107.01 Lacs. The registry has noted delay of 31 days

KARAN KANT JAIN,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), ETAH

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12 arises out of an order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [CIT(A)] dated 15-06-2023 in the matter of an assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s. 144 r.w.s