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

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

iv) of first proviso to sub-s. (5) of 80G of the Act. 17. Therefore, in this ambiguity situation in Circular No. 8 of 2022 of CBDT dt. 31st March, 2022 and latest circular no. 6/2023 dated 24th May, 2023 of the CBDT, we do not have any option but to condone the delay in filing application in Form

SHRI ACHLESHWAR MAHADEVJI JI SARVJANIK NIYAS,GWALIOR vs. CIT(E), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year : 2025-26 Shri Achleshwar Mahadev Ji V Cit (Exemption) Sarvajanik Nyas, Sanatan Bhopal Dharm Mandir Road Gwalior- 474 001 Pan : Aahts1225J (Appellant) (Respondent)

iv) of first proviso to sub-s. (5) of 80G of the Act. 17. Therefore, in this ambiguity situation in Circular No. 8 of 2022 of CBDT dt. 31st March, 2022 and latest circular no. 6/2023 dated 24th May, 2023 of the CBDT, we do not have any option but to condone the delay in filing application in Form

M/S KRISHAK SAHAKARI SHAKKAR KARKHANA,GUNA vs. ACIT CIRCLE-3, GWALIOR

In the result, for statistical purposes, the appeal is treated as allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

17 days in preferring this appeal by the appellant. Thus the appeal is out of the limitation period by 47 days. The appellant in the Form 35 has neither informed nor it has filed any condonation application or any affidavit for the delay caused in filing the appeal. Normally, in case of delayed filing of appeal, the appeal is accompanied

SMT. SARLA DEVI,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 1(1), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The following grounds have been raised: “1. Because the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly and illegally confirmed the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(l)(c) of the I. T. Act. 2. Because the assessee duly discharged her onus of proving the cash credits to be genuine. The addition

ITO WARD-1(1)(2), AGRA vs. MAMTA SINGH, AGRA

Bench: : Shri A.D. Jain & Shri Dr. Mitha Lal Meenaassessment Year: 2007-08 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Mamta Singh, Ward-1(1)(2), Agra 6, Amar Lok Colony, Opposite Jalma Hospital, Agra. (Appellant) Pan :Aobps 7284 K (Respondent)

condoned the delay and admitted the C.O. for hearing. The Learned A.R. was directed to proceed with his arguments. 4. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The learned CIT [Appeals) has erred in law and on fact in deleting the entire impugned additions on technical grounds, and not on merits, without appreciating complete facts

STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A , GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

17- 34-36/Ag/2018 ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K State Bank of 18 City Center, BPLS06616B A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Rajnagar, Chattarpur 19- ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 19,21,22 & 23 State Bank of 22 City Center, BPLS09930E /Ag/2018 India, Branch- Gwalior A.Y.2013-14 Gallamandi, Bhind 23. 24/Ag/2018 ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K State Bank of City Center, BPLS06510A A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Sabalgarh, Morena

STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

17- 34-36/Ag/2018 ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K State Bank of 18 City Center, BPLS06616B A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Rajnagar, Chattarpur 19- ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K 19,21,22 & 23 State Bank of 22 City Center, BPLS09930E /Ag/2018 India, Branch- Gwalior A.Y.2013-14 Gallamandi, Bhind 23. 24/Ag/2018 ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K State Bank of City Center, BPLS06510A A.Y.2013-14 India, Branch- Gwalior Sabalgarh, Morena