SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI ,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXTEMPTION) , BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

section 80G(5)(iv)(B) of the CIT (Exemption) Bhopal Act. Ld. CIT(E) found that provisional registration u/s 12A(1)(ac)(vi) of the Act was granted to the assessee on 15.01.2022 for AY 2022-23 to 2024-25. Assessee was required to apply in form 10AB u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act within six months from

LAYKA SINGH GURJAR,GWALIOR vs. ITO-3(1) , GWALILOR, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: SMT ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH (Judicial Member)

section 249(3) of the Act empowers the first appellate authority to condone the delay if satisfied that appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. Learned CIT(A) was, however not satisfied to condone the said delay of 119

INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASHOKNAGAR vs. AJIT SINGH , SHIVPURI

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh (Through Virtual Hearing) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Ajit Singh, Ashoknagar, Village-Haatodh, Madhya Pradesh Post-Kota, Shivpuri (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ccnps7470K Assessee By : Shri Vipin Upadhyay, Adv Revenue By: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/11/2025

condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal of the revenue for adjudication. 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned NFAC was justified in treating the assessment order framed by the Learned Ajit Singh Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) as non-est in the facts and circumstances

GRAMEEN EVAM SHAHRI WALFARE SANSTHAN ,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 4(1)(3), ALIGARH

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

section 154 of the Act along with application for condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. Inconvenience

GRAMEEN EVAM SHAHRI WELFARE SANSTHAN,ALIGARH vs. ITO, WARD, 4(1)(3), ALIGARH

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

section 154 of the Act along with application for condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. Inconvenience

GRAMEEN EVAM SHAHRI WELFARE SANSTHAN,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD,4(1)(3) ALIGARH, ALIGARH

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing)

section 154 of the Act along with application for condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. Inconvenience

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)

119(2)(b) of the Act seeking condonation before the Central Board of Direct Taxes for Form No. 68 being filed after a lapse of time by stating the following reasons:- a) There is no dispute that the units at Haridwar and Kashipur are entitled for deduction under section 80 IC of the Act. The assessee had submitted audit report

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)

119(2)(b) of the Act seeking condonation before the Central Board of Direct Taxes for Form No. 68 being filed after a lapse of time by stating the following reasons:- a) There is no dispute that the units at Haridwar and Kashipur are entitled for deduction under section 80 IC of the Act. The assessee had submitted audit report

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)

119(2)(b) of the Act seeking condonation before the Central Board of Direct Taxes for Form No. 68 being filed after a lapse of time by stating the following reasons:- a) There is no dispute that the units at Haridwar and Kashipur are entitled for deduction under section 80 IC of the Act. The assessee had submitted audit report

BHARTIYA SADBHAWNA MANCH,JHANSI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 266/Agr/2025 and 267/Agr/2025 are allowed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

delay stands condoned. 3. Since, the facts and issue involved in both these appeals are similar, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts of ITA No. 266/Agr/2025 are only being narrated as under. ITA No. 266/Agr/2025: 4. Brief facts state that assessee filed

BHARTIYA SADBHAWNA MANCH,JHANSI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, LUCKNOW

In the result, ITA No. 266/Agr/2025 and 267/Agr/2025 are allowed

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

delay stands condoned. 3. Since, the facts and issue involved in both these appeals are similar, both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. The facts of ITA No. 266/Agr/2025 are only being narrated as under. ITA No. 266/Agr/2025: 4. Brief facts state that assessee filed

LAXMI FOUNDATION,FIROZABAD vs. ITO EXEMPTION AGRA (CPC) , AGRA

The appeal is dismissed

Bench: : Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2018-19

section 11 of the I.T. Act. This has been considered. 5.5 Further, the Act prescribes remedy u/s 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee may opt for such remedy and may apply for consideration before prescribed authorities. The provisions do not empower CIT(A) to grant such relief. 5.6 On the facts and circumstances