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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2014-15. Ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal preferred against the assessment order dated 22.05.2023 passed u/s. 147/144B of the Act, upon rejection of assessee’s prayer for condonation of delay. Ld. CIT(Appeals), also dismissed assessee’s first

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

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 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

MOHD. YUNUS WARSI,AGRA vs. ITO 1(1)(1), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2014-15

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2014-15, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the first appeal upon rejection of assessee’s prayer for condonation of delay. 2. At the very outset, ld. Representative for the assessee has submitted that this appeal was filed on 28.03.2025 against the impugned

MUSTAKEEN AHAMAD,AGRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -2(1)(2), AGRA

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

condoned the delay in filing the first appeal before the CIT(Appeals), considering the advocate's negligence and the fact that the service of the order was on 07.03.2019, with the appeal filed 64 days later, which is a meager duration beyond the 30-day limit.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["250

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

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

delay is accordingly condoned.\n4. This appeal has been preferred on the ground, in addition to other\ngrounds, that the Id. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the assessment\norder in violation of section 250

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed both the first appeals of assessee as barred by limitation upon rejection of assessee’s prayer for condonation of delay. ITA No.169 & 170/Agr/2025 2. These appeals have been preferred

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment years 2015-16 and 2016-17 respectively, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed both the first appeals of assessee as barred by limitation upon rejection of assessee’s prayer for condonation of delay. ITA No.169 & 170/Agr/2025 2. These appeals have been preferred

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2018-19, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal as barred by limitation, having been filed by a delay of 3 years 5 months. 2. Brief facts state that the appellant is running a non-profit educational institution, namely

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

ASHOK KUMAR PATHAK,MORENA vs. DCIT 2(1) GWALIOR, GWALIOR

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

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2019-20

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2019-20, 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 25.08.2025 against the impugned order dated 02.12.2024 by a delay of about 177 days

SH ABHISHEK GUPTA ,AGRA vs. ITO W2(2)(1),, FIROZABAD

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

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Sudhir Kumarshri Abhishek Gupta The Income Tax Officer 405, Anupam Omerean Ward 2(2)(1), Firozabad, Heights, Mughal Road, V. U.P. Kamla Nagar, Agra-282005 Uttar Pradesh "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aefpg0755D Appellant .. Respondent

condone the delay of 331 days in filing this appeal belatedly beyond the time prescribed u/s 253(3) by 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

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

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed both the first appeals of assessee as barred by limitation upon rejection of assessee’s prayer for condonation of delay of 820 and 873 days. ITA No.156 & 157/Agr/2025

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

In the result, both the appeals are allowed

Bench: : Shri Sunil Kumar Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment years 2018-19 and 2019-20 respectively, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed both the first appeals of assessee as barred by limitation upon rejection of assessee’s prayer for condonation of delay of 820 and 873 days. ITA No.156 & 157/Agr/2025

JAGVIR SINGH KUNTAL,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(2), MATHURA

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

Bench: : Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2017-18

condone the delay in filing this appeal and proceed to decide the appeal on merits. I order accordingly. 5. On merits, ld. Counsel at the outset submitted that the Assessing Officer has passed best judgment assessment u/s. 144 of the Act. Notices u/s. 143(2) and 142(1) were issued by the Assessing 4 | P a g e Officer during

AJAY GUPTA,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICR 1(3)(1), MATHURA

In the result, appeal filed by assessee is allowed

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

condonation of 32 days’ delay and dismissed the appeal as barred by limitation. It is strange to note that Ld. CIT(Appeals) specifically ordered that the appeal is not admitted and dismissed on the ground of delay. However, ld. CIT(Appeals) further proceeded to decide the appeal on merits, though not in accordance with the true spirit of section 250

ANIL KUMAR SINGH,MATHURA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3)(1), MATHURA

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2012-13 Anil Kumar Singh Vs. Ito, Ward –1(3)(1) Pushpanjali Dwarika Near Bhagwan Nagar N.H.-2, Mathura Pan : Axjps7413B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anurag Sinha, Adv. Department By Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 Order

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) for the A.Y. 2012-13, wherein ld CIT has dismissed assessee’s appeal upon rejection of assessee’s request for condonation of delay in filing first appeal. 2. At the very outset, it is noticed that the first appeal was filed on 17.10.20 against the assessment order

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

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2014-15, wherein the ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed assessee’s first appeal ex parte. 2. At the very outset, it is noticed that this appeal has been filed on 06.08.2025 against the impugned order dated 24.03.2024 by a delay of about