RAJESH TYAGI,AMBAH vs. ITO WARD 1, MORENA, MORENA

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

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2020-21 Rajesh Tyagi Vs. Assessment Unit, S/O Laxmi Narayan Tyagi Gavri National Faceless Assessment Service, Gulab Ka Pura Ambah Centre, Income Tax Officer, Distt. Morena Ward-1, Morena Pan : Bmmpt3132K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Sandeep, Ca Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 17.02.2026 Order

condoning the delay. Without prejudice to the above 5. BECAUSE the proceedings under section 147 have neither been validly initiated nor concluded in accordance with the provisions of law and the assessment order passed in pursuance thereof is liable to be declared void-ab- initio. 6. BECAUSE in the absence of valid service of notice under section 148

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,VILLAGE KHIRIYA DEWAT POST KHIRIYA DEWAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

148 days. 7. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee that he is 70 years’ old age agriculturist and is not conversant with internet and computer. He further submitted that due to being seriously ill, he could not visit the office of his consultant. We treat these uncontroverted submissions as just and sufficient and condone the delay

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

148 days. 7. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee that he is 70 years’ old age agriculturist and is not conversant with internet and computer. He further submitted that due to being seriously ill, he could not visit the office of his consultant. We treat these uncontroverted submissions as just and sufficient and condone the delay

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

148 days. 7. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee that he is 70 years’ old age agriculturist and is not conversant with internet and computer. He further submitted that due to being seriously ill, he could not visit the office of his consultant. We treat these uncontroverted submissions as just and sufficient and condone the delay

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

148 days. 7. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee that he is 70 years’ old age agriculturist and is not conversant with internet and computer. He further submitted that due to being seriously ill, he could not visit the office of his consultant. We treat these uncontroverted submissions as just and sufficient and condone the delay

SACHENDRA KUMAR SHARMA,ASHOK NAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ASHOK NAGAR

In the result, all the aforesaid appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

148 days. 7. It has been submitted on behalf of the assessee that he is 70 years’ old age agriculturist and is not conversant with internet and computer. He further submitted that due to being seriously ill, he could not visit the office of his consultant. We treat these uncontroverted submissions as just and sufficient and condone the delay

CHANDRA PRAKASH GOPLANI,BENGALURU vs. ITO 2(1)(1), AGRA

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2012-13

condone the delay of 394 days in filing this appeal belatedly by the assessee with ITAT beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3), and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 5. Brief facts of the case are that after making enquiries on the basis of AIR/NMS, reasons for reopening of the concluded assessment were recorded

DEEPENDRA KUMAR,ETAH vs. ITO,WARD-4(3)(1), ETAH

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

delay of about 944 days caused in filing the appeal is accordingly condoned. 4. Briefly stated, the facts are that based on the information available with the department, it was noticed that the appellant assessee had deposited cash aggregating to ₹14,35,000/- on various dates in his bank 2 | P a g e account No. 0370101027294 maintained with Canara

KRISHNA KUMAR GUPTA,ETAH vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTER, DELHI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2014-15

condone the delay caused in filing this appeal before ITAT. 3. Brief facts state that the appellant assessee is engaged in the wholesale trading business of cement and filed his return of income on 15.10.2014 declaring total income at Rs.4,47,150/-. The assessee had declared gross profit at Rs.27,08,733/- and Net Profit of Rs.5

MR.SHAILENDRA KUMAR ,AGRA vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, both the appeals ITA No

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

148 of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. Assessee filed return of income on 14.04.2021 in response thereof. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) and show cause notice 2 | P a g e ITA No. 228 & 229/Agr/2025 were issued, which remained un-responded on behalf of the assessee. Assessing Officer, therefore, completed the assessment proceedings

MR.SHAILENDRA KUMAR,AGRA vs. ITO,WARD 1(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, both the appeals ITA No

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

148 of the Act was issued and served upon the assessee. Assessee filed return of income on 14.04.2021 in response thereof. Statutory notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) and show cause notice 2 | P a g e ITA No. 228 & 229/Agr/2025 were issued, which remained un-responded on behalf of the assessee. Assessing Officer, therefore, completed the assessment proceedings

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(2) of the Act was not issued in the instant case by the learned AO which becomes fatal

RAMKISHAN,ALIGARH vs. ITO 4(1)(3) ALIGARH, ALIGARH

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

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19]

condone the delay and admit this appeal for hearing. 4. Brief facts of the case: The Assessing Officer noted that the assessee is non-filer and initiated proceedings u/s 148 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, where he had reason to believe that income of Rs.89,20,000/- chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2018-19 had escaped assessment within

SARMAN RAI,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2(3)(3), JHANSI, JHANSI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2012-13

148 of the Act on 29.03.2019, which stood un-responded on behalf of the assessee. Thereafter, notices u/s. 142(1) were issued on various occasions, but for no avail. Show cause notice issued u/s. 144 to the assessee was also not complied with. The Assessing Officer, after seeking bank statement of the assessee from the concerned bank and for want

SAROJ,MAINPURI vs. I.T.O WARD 2(5), MAINPURI

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. Grounds of Appeal raised by the assessee in the Memo of Appeal filed with Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Agra Bench, Agra, reads as under : 1. Because on the facts of the case and being unaware of the notices of appeal hearing uploaded on income tax portal the compliances could

SH VISWADEEPAK TIWARI,GWALIOR vs. ITO 3(1), GWALIOR

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

delay of 311 days. The assessee did not file a return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 and a notice under section 148 was issued. The reassessment order made additions under the head 'income from other sources' on account of investment in mutual funds and credit card bills.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned

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

PANKAJ SUJORIA,MANSAROVAR COLONY vs. ITO 1(1), GWL, GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Pankaj Sujoria, Vs. Ito, A-481, Mansarovar Ward-1(1), Colony, Shahpura, Gwalior Bhopal, Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Arzps0280L Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal of the Assessee for adjudication. 3. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is challenging the action of the lower authorities in not granting the credit for TDS of Rs 32,318/-. Pankaj Sujoria 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused