THE GHARTHOON AGRI CULTURAL SERVICES SOCIETY,PALAMPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - PALAMPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH , PALAMPUR

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

condone the delay in the present appeal also. 8. As observed earlier, this appeal arises out of a penalty proceedings

THE GHARTHOON AGRI CULTURAL SERVICES SOCIETY,KANGRA, HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - PALAMPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH, PALAMPUR

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

condone the delay in the present appeal also. 8. As observed earlier, this appeal arises out of a penalty proceedings

THE GHARTHOON AGRI CULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY ,KANGRA, HIMACHAL PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - PALAMPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH , PALAMPUR

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

condone the delay in the present appeal also. 8. As observed earlier, this appeal arises out of a penalty proceedings

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA, ITO WARD6(3), LUDHIANA, CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A,O, ITO WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

condoned and the matter be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 5.10 It was further submitted that there is a delay in other three appeals as well which have been filed by the assessee against the sustenance of the penalty

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA, ITO WARD-6(3) LUDHIANA, CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A.O. ITO WARD-6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

condoned and the matter be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 5.10 It was further submitted that there is a delay in other three appeals as well which have been filed by the assessee against the sustenance of the penalty

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA,ITO WARD 6(3), LUDHIANA,CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A.O. ITO WARD 6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

condoned and the matter be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 5.10 It was further submitted that there is a delay in other three appeals as well which have been filed by the assessee against the sustenance of the penalty

GOLDEN WINES, 2673 PHASE-1, BASANT AVENUE, DUGRI,LUDHIANA vs. NARESH KUMAR MEENA, ITO WARD-6(3) LUDHIANA, CURRENT JURISDICTIONAL A.O. ITO WARD-6(1), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, all these appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

condoned and the matter be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A). 5.10 It was further submitted that there is a delay in other three appeals as well which have been filed by the assessee against the sustenance of the penalty

JYOTI SHARMA,PINJORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, PANCHKULA

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

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

delay had happened while filing the appeal against the imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) and 271(1)(d) of the Act and in those matters, similar reasons were submitted seeking condonation

JATINDER NATH,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

penalty appeal is concerned, we find that there is a delay of 206 days in filing the appeal. By following our finding in the quantum appeal, we condone

JATINDER NATH,LUDHIANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), LUDHIANA, RISHI NAGAR, LUDHIANA

In the result, both appeals are allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

penalty appeal is concerned, we find that there is a delay of 206 days in filing the appeal. By following our finding in the quantum appeal, we condone

DAVINDER SINGH,MOHALI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-6(4), MOHALI, MOHALI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

penalty in the shape of tax liability on this addition is far disproportionate to the negligence even if committed by the assessee by making his appeal time barred by 62 days. Therefore, we condone the delay

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

penalty notices that we contacted our counsel and found that the appeal has not been filed. 3. That as submitted in above Paras, the delay was not intentional and we have not gained any benefit in late filing of appeal and we are keenly interested to pursue the appeal filed on merits. Resultantly, it is humbly submitted that the delay

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

penalty notices that we contacted our counsel and found that the appeal has not been filed. 3. That as submitted in above Paras, the delay was not intentional and we have not gained any benefit in late filing of appeal and we are keenly interested to pursue the appeal filed on merits. Resultantly, it is humbly submitted that the delay

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

penalty notices that we contacted our counsel and found that the appeal has not been filed. 3. That as submitted in above Paras, the delay was not intentional and we have not gained any benefit in late filing of appeal and we are keenly interested to pursue the appeal filed on merits. Resultantly, it is humbly submitted that the delay

DEEPIKA SINGLA,BARNALA vs. ITO, WARD 1, BARNALA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 610/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year. : 2017-18 Deepika Singla, Vs The Ito, Lekh Raj Moti Lal, Ward-1, Sadar Bazar, Barnala. Barnala. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Awzps9654H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nagesh Behl, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 O R D E R Hybrid Hearing Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

condonation of delay. The affidavit annexed by the assessee alongwith the application reads as under : A.Y. 2017-18 2 “I the above-named deponent, am well conversant with the below. 1. That the appeal filed by me before the LD. Commissioner (Appeals) was disposed of by order dated 21.01.2024 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi 2. That

HEALTH BIOTECH LIIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

penalty proceedings is time barred by 712 days. The ld.CIT (Appeals) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED ,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

penalty proceedings is time barred by 712 days. The ld.CIT (Appeals) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

penalty proceedings is time barred by 712 days. The ld.CIT (Appeals) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal

SAHIL PHUTELA,AMBALA CITY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4, AMBALA , AMBALA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1383/Chd/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Sahil Phutela, The Ito, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh,Advocate, Vs Ward -4, 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. Ambala. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Cmvpp7771G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2026

condoning the delay of 1041 days and confirming the penalty levied u/s 271E of the Income Tax Act. A.Y.2017-18 2 3. The brief