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

19,698/- , which did not match with the return filed by the assessee and the declared sales of Rs.51,01,31,327/-. Based on the aforesaid information, proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act were initiated by issuing notice u/s. 148 dated 30.07.2022, in response to 2 | P a g e ITA No.463 & 464/Agr/2025 which the assessee filed return of income

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

19,698/- , which did not match with the return filed by the assessee and the declared sales of Rs.51,01,31,327/-. Based on the aforesaid information, proceedings u/s. 147 of the Act were initiated by issuing notice u/s. 148 dated 30.07.2022, in response to 2 | P a g e ITA No.463 & 464/Agr/2025 which the assessee filed return of income

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

section as he rejected it on technical ground. Therefore, in these facts and circumstances we hold that the assessee had made the application in Form 10AB within the prescribed time limit and hence it is valid application. Therefore, we direct the learned CIT(Exemptions) to treat the application as filed within statutory time and verify assessee's eligibility

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 as he rejected it on technical ground. Therefore, in these facts and circumstances we hold that the assessee had made the application in Form 10AB within the prescribed time limit and hence it is valid application. Therefore, we direct the learned CIT(Exemptions) to treat the application as filed within statutory time and verify assessee's eligibility

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

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

condone the delay of more than two years in filing the appeals before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Ld. DR has accordingly supported the impugned order. 4. Perusal of both the impugned orders shows that common reason for the delay was raised by the assessee for both the assessment years 2018- 19 and 2019-20. For the sake of convenience, relevant

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

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

condone the delay of more than two years in filing the appeals before the ld. CIT(Appeals). Ld. DR has accordingly supported the impugned order. 4. Perusal of both the impugned orders shows that common reason for the delay was raised by the assessee for both the assessment years 2018- 19 and 2019-20. For the sake of convenience, relevant

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

19. Prayed to condone the delay. 3. It is well established principle of law that the substantial justice cannot be denied on technical aberrations. The object of prescribing procedure is to advance the cause of justice. In an adversial justice system like ours, no party should ordinarily be denied the opportunity of participating in the process of justice dispensation. Justice

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

19- 20 in this regard he notice the proceedings after which he filed form 35. I humbly request you to condone the delay made and admit my appeal and do not treat the appeal as invalid." 2.2. Further, it was submitted by the ld. AR that there was also a delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The details

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

19- 20 in this regard he notice the proceedings after which he filed form 35. I humbly request you to condone the delay made and admit my appeal and do not treat the appeal as invalid." 2.2. Further, it was submitted by the ld. AR that there was also a delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The details

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

19- 20 in this regard he notice the proceedings after which he filed form 35. I humbly request you to condone the delay made and admit my appeal and do not treat the appeal as invalid." 2.2. Further, it was submitted by the ld. AR that there was also a delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The details

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

BHAGVAN DAS L/H SHRI GAURI SHANKER,FIROZABAD vs. ITO WARD 2(2)(1), FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

19 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012-13, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s appeal, confirming the assessment order dated 29.09.2017 ITA No. 260 & 259/Agr/2025 passed u/s. 144/147 of the Act and also dismissed

BHAGVAN DAS L/H SHRI GAURI SHANKER,FIROZABAD vs. ITO WARD 2(2)1, FIROZABAD

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

19 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2012-13, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s appeal, confirming the assessment order dated 29.09.2017 ITA No. 260 & 259/Agr/2025 passed u/s. 144/147 of the Act and also dismissed

PRIYAVRAT SHARMA,AGRA vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

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

delay caused in filing this second appeal stands condoned. 3. The brief facts state that the appellant assessee filed his return of Income for the year under consideration, declaring total Income at Rs. 5,24,040/- and worked out long term capital gain/loss of (-) 2,72,271/- on sale of two plots of land as under. 1) Land 03/12/2018 Value

RAMBALRAAM CHAINSS PRIVATE LIMITED,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1)(1), AGRA, AGRA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Rambalraam Chainss Pvt. Ltd, Vs. Ito, 1/98 & 1/99, Kasera Bazar, Ward-1(1)(1), Johari Bazar, Agra Fort- Agra 282003, Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakcr0768H Assessee By : Shri S. C. Jain, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 19/11/2025

19-10- 2022. This had ultimately resulted in raising a tax demand on the assessee of Rs 98,450/- along with interest under section 234B and 234C of the Act by the learned CPC. When the matter was carried before the learned CITA with a delay of 36 days in preferring the appeal before the learned CITA, the learned CITA

SHOBHA DEVI ,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHANSI,UP

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Shobha Devi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 285, Suri Wali Gali, Ward-2(3)(1), Near Masjid Pratap Jhansi Pura Nagar, Sipri Bzaaar, Jhansi, Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Ainpd4091R 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. Shobha Devi 3. The first issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs 12,19,200/- made on account of unexplained investment under section

KALPTARU VIKASH SAMITI,KOTESHWAR ROAD vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD GWALIOR

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

Bench: SHRI M. BALAGANESH, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SUNIL KUMAR SINGH, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

19-12-2002 passed by Learned CIT Gwalior. Later the assessee was also registered with the Learned CIT (Exemptions) under section 12AB of the Act as a charitable trust vide order dated 21-06-2023. The assessee was established in 1996 as a voluntary organization and got registered under Madhya Pradesh Firms and Societies Registration Act 1973. The organization started

GORA BAI SAHU ,ASHOK NAGAR vs. ITO ASHOK NAGAR, ASHOK NAGAR

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2012-13] Gora Bai Sahu, Income Tax Officer, Shri Ram Charan Sahu & Ashok Nagar, L/H Late Gora Bai, Sony Vs Madhya Pradesh-473331 Colony, Ashok Nagar, Madhya Pradesh-473331 Pan-Fdzps8877N Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Pankaj Gargh, Adv. Respondent By Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 15.09.2025 Order

19 days in filing of the present appeal before us. In this regard, a condonation petition has been filed by the Shri Ramcharan Sahu, aged about 84 years husband of late Gora Bai Sahu (assessee in this case). The said affidavit dated 29.03.2025 filed by Shri Ram Charan Sahu is reproduced as under:- 4 ITA No.35/Agr/2023 2.1. Further, the affidavit