AMANDIP SIINGH,HOUSE NO. NEAR NEHAR PATTI vs. ITO WARD 1, TARN TARAN, ITO WARD , TARN TARAN SARHALI ROAD

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

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

154 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) dated 14.07.2022. 2. There is a delay of 183 days in filing the appeal before us. The assessee has filed a condonation application, which is reproduced as under:- “Regarding: Application for condonation of delay in the filing of appeal in the case of Amandip Singh

INDU MAHAJAN,AMRITSAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF TAX CIRCLE-5 , AMRITSAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing no

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

condoned. 4. The brief fact of case is that the assessee has filed return u/s 139(1) for the impugned assessment year. By passing the audit report of the assessee the return was processed by CPC u/s 143(1) and the disallowance was made for late deposit of contribution made in respect

PRANAY MAHAJAN WELFARE TRUST,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 2(1), AMRITSAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

condone the same, and we are in agreement with the view taken by the ld. first appellate authority. 7. As such, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. I.T.A. No. 458/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2015-16: 8. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the facts are identical to ITA No. 457/Asr/2024 with the only exception that the delay in filing

PRANAY MAHAJAN WELFARE TRUST,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2(1), AMRITSAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

condone the same, and we are in agreement with the view taken by the ld. first appellate authority. 7. As such, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. I.T.A. No. 458/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2015-16: 8. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the facts are identical to ITA No. 457/Asr/2024 with the only exception that the delay in filing

PRANAY MAHAJAN WELFARE TRUST,MEDICAL ENCLAVE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -2(1), AMRITSAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

condone the same, and we are in agreement with the view taken by the ld. first appellate authority. 7. As such, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. I.T.A. No. 458/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2015-16: 8. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the facts are identical to ITA No. 457/Asr/2024 with the only exception that the delay in filing

PRANAY MAHAJAN WELFARE TRUST,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), AMRITSAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

condone the same, and we are in agreement with the view taken by the ld. first appellate authority. 7. As such, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. I.T.A. No. 458/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2015-16: 8. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the facts are identical to ITA No. 457/Asr/2024 with the only exception that the delay in filing

PRANAY MAHAJAN WELFARE TRUST,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), AMRITSAR

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

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

condone the same, and we are in agreement with the view taken by the ld. first appellate authority. 7. As such, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. I.T.A. No. 458/Asr/2024 for A.Y. 2015-16: 8. In this appeal filed by the assessee, the facts are identical to ITA No. 457/Asr/2024 with the only exception that the delay in filing

HARDIK BHARTI,JALANDHAR vs. ITO WARD 4(3) , JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

section 154 and as such, the application has been disposed of accordingly without any benefit to the assessee. 4. The matter carried in appeal before the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, has been dismissed in limine, without admitting the appeal for hearing and adjudication on merits, because the appeal was belatedly filed by 50 days and the deficiency letter issued

M/S JAMMU COOPERATIVE WHOLE SALE LIMITED,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (1), JAMMU

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No. 150/Asr/2020 Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/S Jammu Cooperative Whole Sale The Ito Limited (Super Bazar) Old Hospital Ward-2(1) Road, City Chowk, Jammu- Jammu 180001(J&K)-180001

delay of seven days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication on merits. 4. The first grounds raised is general pertaining to consideration of fact of the case and applicable law shall be taken up in adjudicating the issue based grounds and hence, it does not require an independent adjudication