RANJANA DEVI,MAUR MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), BATHINDA
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes
ITA 410/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 410/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjana Devi, C/O Jishu Trading Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Co. Maur Mandi, Punjab. Bathinda. [Pan:-Alzpd4607L] (Appellant) (Respondent) None. Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr.
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 69A
condoned and the appeal admitted for hearing on merits.
Substantial justice is more important than the procedural delay.
3. At the outset, during the course of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Bench.
4. The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal:
“1. That order passed u/s 250 of the Income
