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

143(3) of the Act, assessing total income at Rs.9,46,720/-. Subsequently, as per information available with the department, it was noticed by Assessing Officer that the assessee made bogus purchases of Rs.1,31,58,116/- from one Shri Kallu Kureshi and there were various credit transactions in different bank accounts of the assessee totaling to Rs.13

M/SWAHEGURU BUSINESS (P) LTD.,SARV NAGAR vs. DCIT-CC, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

section 143 (3) of the Act. 3.1 In respect to the appeal I.T.A No. 73 to 79/Agra/2020 and ITA 80 TO 85, it was submitted that the assessee is availing the VSV and therefore the matter may kindly be remitted back to the file of the CIT(A) after condoning the delay

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFICER SHIVPURI, SHIVPURI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

condone the delay of 315 days(actual delay 224 days) in filing this appeal in ITA no. 113/Agr/2024 belatedly beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3) of the assessee, and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits. Reference is drawn to judgment and order of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition , Anantnag v. Mst. Katijee

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER SHIVPURI, GWALIOR

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

condone the delay of 315 days(actual delay 224 days) in filing this appeal in ITA no. 113/Agr/2024 belatedly beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3) of the assessee, and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits. Reference is drawn to judgment and order of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition , Anantnag v. Mst. Katijee

CHANDRAPAL SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER SHIVPURI, SHIPURI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar

condone the delay of 315 days(actual delay 224 days) in filing this appeal in ITA no. 113/Agr/2024 belatedly beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3) of the assessee, and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits. Reference is drawn to judgment and order of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition , Anantnag v. Mst. Katijee

AARUSH JAIN FAMILY TRUST,ASHOKNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

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. In the instant case, learned CIT(A) was not satisfied to condone the said delay in filing the first appeals on 04.11.2023 against the intimations u/s. 143

AARUSH JAIN FAMILY TRUST,ASHOKNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD GWALIOR, GWALIOR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

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. In the instant case, learned CIT(A) was not satisfied to condone the said delay in filing the first appeals on 04.11.2023 against the intimations u/s. 143

RADHIKA GARG,HATHRAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(3), AGRA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Radhika Garg, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 14/100, Kambhu Tola Ward-2(1)(3), Hospital Road, Hathras, Up Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Afepg2999H Assessee By : Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/11/2025

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication in the interest of substantial justice. 3. I find that the assessee vide ground number 5 had raised a preliminary ground stating that the statutory notice under section 143

SNEHA PANDEY,ETAWAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(2)(5) ETAWAH, ETAWAH

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act.\n2. At the very outset, we notice that the assessee filed this second\nappeal on 12.03.2025 against the impugned order passed on 15.05.2024.\nThe reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay are that\nthe e-main Id mentioned in Form No. 35 was of assessee's earlier counsel,\nwho

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

condonation of delay supported by affidavit filed by assessee before ld. CIT(A), keeping in view the provisions of section 282 of 1961 Act read with Rule 127 of the 1962 Rulesas well judicial precedents in the matter, after making necessary enquiry as to the effecting of service of intimation dated 19.10.2017 u/s 143

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

143(1) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before learned CIT(Appeals), who dismissed assessee’s first appeal in limine, being beyond the period of limitation as provided u/s. 249(2) of the Act. 4. This second appeal has been filed on the ground, with others on merit, that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred

MAHARAJA AGRASEN SEWA SADAN,SELECT CITY vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), AYAKAR BAHWAN

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Ramit Kochar & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Maharaja Agrasen Sewa Vs. Ito (Exemption) Sadan, Mughal Road, Kamla Ayakar Bhawan Nagar, Agra Uttar Pradesh 282005 Pan No. Aaatm6506F (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 143(3) of the Income- Tax Act 1961[hereinafter referred as ‘the Act. 2. An adjournment application moved on behalf of the assessee to adjourn the case, no ground to adjourn the case hence, the application is rejected. The bench decided to proceed to decide the issue with the assistance of ld. D.R. 3. The assessee has raised following

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

condoning the delay despite established judicial principles that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations (Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST Katiji, 167 ITR 471, SC). 4. That the learned CIT(A), after calling for a remand report from the ITO (Exemption), Agra, and after conducting multiple hearings on merits, erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay

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

condoning the delay despite established judicial principles that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations (Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST Katiji, 167 ITR 471, SC). 4. That the learned CIT(A), after calling for a remand report from the ITO (Exemption), Agra, and after conducting multiple hearings on merits, erred in dismissing the appeal solely on the ground of delay

OXFORD SIKSHA SAMITI ,BHOPAL vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, GWALIOR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

143(1) of the Act dated 29.03.2021 and 05.02.2021 respectively. The limitation period for filing an appeal before learned CIT(A) u/s. 249(2) of the Act is 30 days. However section 249(3) of the Act empowers the first appellate authority to condone the delay

OXFORD SIKSHA SAMITI ,BHOPAL vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, GWALIOR

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

143(1) of the Act dated 29.03.2021 and 05.02.2021 respectively. The limitation period for filing an appeal before learned CIT(A) u/s. 249(2) of the Act is 30 days. However section 249(3) of the Act empowers the first appellate authority to condone the delay

EBENEZER SHIKSHA PRASAR SAMITI,KONCH, JALAUN vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

condone the delay in the filing of the appeal by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) for AYs 2016-17 and 2018-19. 3. Brief facts of the case: The assessee Ebenezer Shiksha Prasar Samiti is an educational institution and is a registered Co-operative Society. The assessee filed its original return of income for the respective assessment years

EBENEZER SHIKSHA PRASAR SAMITI,1, NEW PATEL NAGAR, KONCH, JALAUN, KONCH S.O (JALAUN) vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

condone the delay in the filing of the appeal by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) for AYs 2016-17 and 2018-19. 3. Brief facts of the case: The assessee Ebenezer Shiksha Prasar Samiti is an educational institution and is a registered Co-operative Society. The assessee filed its original return of income for the respective assessment years