MEENU, GOVINDPUR, ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CPC (NFAC, DELHI), DELHI

Appeal stands dismissed in- limine on the ground of limitation

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Meenu V. The Income Tax Officer Mig-23, Govindpur Cpc A-503, Satpushp Apartment Civil Lines, Allahabad Pan:Akfpm3770J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri S. K. Yogeshwar, Advocate Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.02.2023, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 05.08.2017, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.8,30,470/-. The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bangalore, Vide Intimation Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’), Dated 26.03.2019 Assessed The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.16,12,650/-.

1. That the authority below has added Rs.2,87,478/- without any basis, which is exempted income. 2. That the order passed is bad in law and on facts. 2.3 The Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted that there is a delay of 824 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. He further submitted that

SHERVANI SUGAR SYNDICATE LIMITED,GHAZIABAD vs. DC/ACIT-2, ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2012-13 Shervani Sugar Syndicate V. National Faceless Limited Assessment Centre 17, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad- Delhi. 201001. Pan:Aadcs3658L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shervani Sugar Syndicate V. Dc/Acit-2, Allahabad Limited Office Of The Assistant C/O 17, Navyug Market, Commissioner Of Income Ghaziabad-201001. Tax, Allahabad, Allahabad-211001. Pan:Aadcs3658L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Madhav Kapur Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 23 09 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2025 O R D E R

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M.: These two appeals have been filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2012-13 against the respective impugned appellate orders each dated 14.02.2025. For the sake of convenience, both appeals were heard together and are being ITA No.137 & 138/ALLD/2025 Page 2 of 6 disposed of by way of consolidated order. First

SHERVANI SUGAR SYNDICATE LIMITED,C/O B. K. KAPUR CO. vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2012-13 Shervani Sugar Syndicate V. National Faceless Limited Assessment Centre 17, Navyug Market, Ghaziabad- Delhi. 201001. Pan:Aadcs3658L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shervani Sugar Syndicate V. Dc/Acit-2, Allahabad Limited Office Of The Assistant C/O 17, Navyug Market, Commissioner Of Income Ghaziabad-201001. Tax, Allahabad, Allahabad-211001. Pan:Aadcs3658L (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Madhav Kapur Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 23 09 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2025 O R D E R

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M.: These two appeals have been filed by the assessee pertaining to assessment year 2012-13 against the respective impugned appellate orders each dated 14.02.2025. For the sake of convenience, both appeals were heard together and are being ITA No.137 & 138/ALLD/2025 Page 2 of 6 disposed of by way of consolidated order. First

GYAN VIKAS SAMITI,AMBEDKAR NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , AMBEDKAR NAGAR

In the result, the impugned orders of the Ld

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted applications for condonation of delay, supported by affidavit. The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to the delay being condoned. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in application seeking condonation of delay in filing of these appeals; we condone the delay in filing of these appeals

GYAN VIKAS SAMITI ,AMBEDKAR NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBEDKAR NAGAR

In the result, the impugned orders of the Ld

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted applications for condonation of delay, supported by affidavit. The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to the delay being condoned. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in application seeking condonation of delay in filing of these appeals; we condone the delay in filing of these appeals

UNIQUE BOOND FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeals pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeals for hearing. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s I.T.A. No.74 & 75/Alld/2025 2 application

UNIQUE BOOND FOUNDATION,JAIPUR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeals pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeals for hearing. The learned Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s I.T.A. No.74 & 75/Alld/2025 2 application

BHARTIYA SHIKSHA SAMMITTEE KASHI PRADESH,ALLAHABAD vs. DC/ACIT-2(CPC) , ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal; I.T.A. No.182/Alld/2024 Assessment Year:2015-16 3 pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express

BALESHWAR NATH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,,BHADOHI vs. CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental Representative for Revenue did not express any objection to assessee’s application for condonation

HASAN JAVED,MEERANPUR vs. ITO, AMBEDKARNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. (B) This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee

GRAM SEWA MANDAL,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO EXEMPTION- WARD (EXEMPTION), ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

253(3) of IT Act. The assessee has submitted application for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal pleading that the delay was unintentional and beyond the control of the assessee and has requested to admit the appeal for hearing. The learned Sr. Departmental I.T.A. No.162/Alld/2024 Assessment Year:2017-18 2 Representative for Revenue did not express any objection

R.D. SINHG SHIKSHAN SEWA SANSTHAN,PRAYAGRAJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WRAD ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. These two appeals vide I.T.A. No.70 & 71/Alld/2025 have been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 & 2014-15 against impugned appellate orders both dated 27/04/2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052398028(1) and No.ITBA /NFAC /S/ 250 / 2023-24/1052398435(1) respectively of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. I.T.A. No.70

R.D. SINGH SHIKSHAN SEWA SANSTHAN ,PRAYAGRAJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION) WARD ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. These two appeals vide I.T.A. No.70 & 71/Alld/2025 have been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 & 2014-15 against impugned appellate orders both dated 27/04/2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1052398028(1) and No.ITBA /NFAC /S/ 250 / 2023-24/1052398435(1) respectively of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. I.T.A. No.70

ACHCHHE LAL YADAV (DECEASED) L/H AMAR SINGH YADAV,ALLAHABAD vs. ITO, WARD- 2(1)ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

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

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA, J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.93/Alld//2025 has been filed by the assessee against the impugned appellate order dated 27/05/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1065139877(1) of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee beyond time limit prescribed under section 253(3) of IT Act. The assessee

VISHNU KUMAR KESARWANI ,PRAYAGRAJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2(3), ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

D E R PER ANADEE NATH MISSHRA, A.M. (A) This appeal vide I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2011-12 against impugned appellate order dated 21/03/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1063130244(1) of Addl/JCIT of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“ADDL/JCIT(A)” for short]. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under: I.T.A. No.116/Alld/2025

HARISH CHANDAR MISHRA,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- 2(1) ALLAHABAD, ALLAHABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.26/Alld/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2016-17 against impugned appellate order dated 29/12/2023 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023- 24/1059194517(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section

ISRAIL,CHITRAKOOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BANDA

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

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.30/Alld/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 against impugned appellate order dated 07/02/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1060608080(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section

SAINT MARYS EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), PRAYAGRAJ, PRAYAGRAJ

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria, Ju Dicial Member

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.61/Alld/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2018-19 against impugned appellate order dated 30/05/2024 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024- 25/1065271437(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. 2. This appeal has been filed by the assessee, beyond time limit prescribed under section

CHHEDI LAL GUPTA,PRATAPGARH vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, PRATAPGARH

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

Bench: Shri Subhash Malguria & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

D E R PER SUBHASH MALGURIA:J.M. This appeal vide I.T.A. No.144/Alld/2025 has been filed by the assessee for assessment year 2017-2018 against impugned appellate order dated 27/05/2025 (DIN & Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025- 26/1076477015(1) of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [“CIT(A)” for short]. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: “1. Because the order passed