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

20. Respectfully following the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vishwa Jagriti Mission (supra), wherein the delay in filing application for registration under s. 12A, was allowable/condoned, hence, we condone the delay in filing Form 10AB, under s. 80G(5), and remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(Exemptions) with

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

20. Respectfully following the judgement of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vishwa Jagriti Mission (supra), wherein the delay in filing application for registration under s. 12A, was allowable/condoned, hence, we condone the delay in filing Form 10AB, under s. 80G(5), and remit the matter back to the file of learned CIT(Exemptions) with

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

section 69A r.w.s. 115BBE of the Act, even cash deposit amount is not correct which is Rs.5,10,000/- only. 8. BECAUSE under the facts and circumstance and in law the Assessing Officer has erred in making addition of Rs. 4,68,237/-on account of estimated business income on the basis of deposits in bank account over and above

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

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

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

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

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

20 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 ex parte. 2. At the very outset, it is noted that this appeal was filed on 27.06.2025 against

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

S S MEMORIAL SHIKSHAN SAMAJ SEWA SANSTHAN ,ETAWAH vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, AGRA, AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2016-17

20 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 2016-17, wherein Ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal upon rejection of assessee’s prayer for condonation of delay of 142 days. 2. Brief facts state that

NEETA AGARWAL,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 2(1)(2), AGRA, AGRA

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh(Through Virtual Hearing) Neeta Agarwal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-23, New Agra, Agra Ward-2(1)(2), Agra (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaxpa0936E Assessee By : Shri Amit Goyal, Adv Shri Nitin Goyal, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/12/2025

condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal of the Assessee for adjudication. 3. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal before us:- Neeta Agarwal “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming

SANJAY GULATI,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1)(4), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2011-12

20 by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC, Delhi u/s. 250(6) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals), dismissed assessee’s first appeal. 2. At the very outset, ld. Representative for assessee has requested to condone the delay of about 452 days (469 days according to assessee

ZILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT,GUNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GUNA, GUNA

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

section 250 of the Act, wherein Ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed/dismissed assessee’sappeals respectively. 2. At the very outset, it is noticed that both the appeals are time-barred by 39-40 days respectively. Delay condonation applications on behalf of Smt. RoshaniRaghuvanshi, staff member of the appellant are on record. The cause for the delay shown, is that

ZILA SAHKARI KENDRIYA BANK MARYADIT,GUNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GUNA, GUNA

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

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

section 250 of the Act, wherein Ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed/dismissed assessee’sappeals respectively. 2. At the very outset, it is noticed that both the appeals are time-barred by 39-40 days respectively. Delay condonation applications on behalf of Smt. RoshaniRaghuvanshi, staff member of the appellant are on record. The cause for the delay shown, is that

SONY RESIDENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,FIROZABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(2), FIROZABAD

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

condone the delay in filing of appeals before me and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA Nos. 214 & 215/AGR/2025 Sony Residency Pvt. Ltd 3. I find that the assessment order has been framed under section 144, r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 20

SONY RESIDENCY PRIVATE LIMITED,FIROZABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(2)(2), FIROZABAD

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing)

condone the delay in filing of appeals before me and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA Nos. 214 & 215/AGR/2025 Sony Residency Pvt. Ltd 3. I find that the assessment order has been framed under section 144, r.w.s. 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act on 20

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

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

condone the delay and admit the\nappeal of the assessee for adjudication.\n3.\nNone appeared on behalf of the assessee despite issuance of notice.\nHence we proceed to dispose of this appeal after hearing the Id DR and\nbased on materials available on record.\n4.\nThe assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:-\n\"1.\nThe Order

RAMESHWAR DAYAL, JAIPUR,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 3(2),GWALIOR , GWALIOR

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Rameshwar Dayal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. 2, Chitrkoot Ward-3(2), Colony, Near Fojawali Gwalior School, Kotputli, Jaipur, 303 108, Rajasthan (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Afepa7981H Assessee By : Shri Devang Gargiega, Adv Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 30/09/2025

condone the delay in filing of appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. Rameshwar Dayal 3. The only effective issue to be decided on merits is challenging the addition of cash deposits made in ICICI Bank in the sum of Rs 10,05,000/- . 4. I have heard the rival submissions and perused

DEEPAK KUMAR AGRAWAL S/O SHRI LATE RATAN LAL AGRAWAL,TIKAMGARH vs. ITO, TIKAMGARH

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Deepak Kumar Agrawal, Vs. Ito, Ward No. 12, Purani Tikamgarh Tehsil, New Housing Board, Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Axapa3069L Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/11/2025 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 issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs 15,25,500/- on Deepak Kumar Agrawal account of cash deposits in the bank account