THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed

Bench: This Tribunal. The Assesseee Is Aggrieved By The Common Order Bearing Number Itba/Apl/M/250/2019- 20/1021304437(1) Dt. 25/11/2019 Of Cit(A) Shimla, H.P. Passed U/S 250 Of The Act Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The “Impugned Order”. The Relevant Assessment Year Is 2016-17 & The Corresponding Previous Year Period Is From 01/04/2015 To 31/03/2016. 2. At The Outset The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Above Appeals Are Barred By Limitation By 02 Days.

section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for sake of convenience and ease) before this Tribunal. The assesseee is aggrieved by the common order bearing number ITBA/APL/M/250/2019- 20/1021304437(1) dt. 25/11/2019 of CIT(A) Shimla, H.P. passed u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. The relevant

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), CHANDIGARH vs. M/S SML ISUZU LTD., CHANDIGARH

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

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Revenue is aggrieved by the order no. ITBA/FAC/250/2022- 23/1044150537(1) dt. 22/07/2022 of the Ld. CIT(A) passed under section 250 of the Act, which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. 2. At the outset the Registry has pointed out that the appeal filed by the Revenue is time barred

SMT. GINNY SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

condonation of delay.\n4. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the\nTribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of\nmemorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant\nperiod, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for\nnot presenting it within that period. This expression\nsufficient cause employed in the section has also been used

SH. DINESH SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

condonation of delay.\n4. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the\nTribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of\nmemorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant\nperiod, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for\nnot presenting it within that period. This expression\nsufficient cause employed in the section has also been used

SMT. GINNY SOIN,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CC-II, LUDHIANA

The appeals are partly allowed

condonation of delay.\n4. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the\nTribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of\nmemorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant\nperiod, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for\nnot presenting it within that period. This expression\nsufficient cause employed in the section has also been used

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

condonation of delay. However, ld. First Appellate Authority did not accept this explanation of the assessee and dismissed it being time barred. 3. With the assistance of ld. representative, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are\r\nallowed

253 of the\r\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for sake of\r\nconvenience and ease) before this Tribunal. The assesseee is aggrieved\r\nby the common order bearing number ITBA/APL/M/2019-\r\n20/1021304437(1) dt. 25/11/2019 of CIT(A) Shimla, H.P. passed u/s 250 of\r\nthe Act which is hereinafter referred

THE H.P.STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SIRMOUR vs. ITO(TDS), SOLAN

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the Assessee are\nallowed

253 of the\nIncome Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for sake of\nconvenience and ease) before this Tribunal. The assesseee is aggrieved\nby the common order bearing number ITBA/APL/M/250/2019-\n20/1021304437(1) dt. 25/11/2019 of CIT(A) Shimla, H.P. passed u/s 250 of\nthe Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. The\nrelevant assessment

DCIT, C-1(1) , CHANDIGARH vs. M/S FIDELITY INFORMATION SERVICES INDIA PVT. LTD., CHANDIGARH

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

delay in filing the cross- objection is condoned and the same is hereby admitted for necessary adjudication. 26. Now, coming to the various grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in its cross-objection so filed, it is noted that the assessee has effectively challenged the action of the AO in levying interest amounting

THE BAROT CO-OPERATIVE MULTIPURPOSE SOCIETY LIMITED,MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, MANDI

The appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr Krinwant Sahay & Shri Paresh M. Joshiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 671/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 The Barot Cooperative Vs. The Ito, बनाम Mandi Multipurpose Society Limited, Mandi, Himachal Pradesh 176120 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aacat9554D अपीलाथ"/ Appellant ""यथ"/ Repsondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Rahul Sohu, Jcit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 01.07.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.07.2024 आदेश/Order

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 bearing No; ITBA/NFAC/5/250/2023-24/1105-689277 (1) dated 09/10/2023 which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. The Assessee 671-Chd-2023 The Barot Cooperative Multipurpose Society Limited, Mandi, H.P. 2 PAN is AACAT9554D

FARID EDUCATIONAL SOCIAL WELFARE AND CHARITABLE SOCIETY,NEW SHASTRI NAGAR vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

Bench: This Hon'Ble

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) before this Hon'ble Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1063054999(1) dated 21.03.2024 of ld. Addl.CIT(A) passed under ITA 608/CHD/2024 A.Y. 2022-23 2 Section 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “impugned order”. The relevant assessment year

DEVI DAYAL,KAITHAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 , KAITHAL

In the result, appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 899/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09 Shri Devi Dayal, Vs The Ito, Pundri Anaj Mandi, Ward – 1, Kaithal-Haryana 136026. Kaithal. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aajpd5851H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca & Ms. Shruti Khandelwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Manav Bansal, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025

delay in filing the appeal should not be condoned. 4. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause A.Y.2008-09 3

M/S VALCO INDUSTRIES LTD.,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT-CC-1, CHANDIGARH

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 125/Chd/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2004-05 Valco Industries Ltd., Vs The Dcit, Sco 37, Sector 26, Central Circle-1, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaacv5195J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Revenue By : Shri Yogesh Monga, Ca Assessee By : Shri Anil Kumar Sharma, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.09.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R Per Rajpal Yadav, Vp

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used A.Y.2004-05 3 identically in sub-section 3 of section

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

delay in filing the appeal is because of the above-mentioned reasons and my husband physical disability.” 3. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting

AJAR AMAR STEELS 1725 10G, 3-A, FOCAL POINT LUDHIANA 141010,PUNJAB vs. THE PCIT (CENTRAL) LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 950/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ajar Amar Steels, Vs The Pcit (Central), 1725 10G, 3-A, Focal Point, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aaefa8866A अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.09.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

delay in filing the appeal deserves to be condoned. 5.1 It is pertinent to note that sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period

BALDEV SINGH,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARDS 1, FATEHBAD

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yaday & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 813/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Baldev Singh, Vs. The Ito, बनाम M/S Baldev Singh Jarnail Ward-1, Singh, Anaj Mandi, Fatehabad Dharsul Kalan, Tehsil Tohana, Fatehabad

condone the aforesaid delay. 3. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives we have gone through the record carefully. 813 -Chd-2024- Baldev Singh, Fatehabad 3 4. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

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

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1240/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Kulbir Singh, The Ito, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate V Ward 6(4), # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. S Mohali. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Butps5735C अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 02.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.09.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R

delay be condoned and appeal be decided on merits. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, submitted that once the order is being uploaded on the portal, it is automatically intimated to the assessee. He should be more vigilant about prosecuting income tax litigation. 4. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

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

condone the delay of 282 days in filing of appeal for the A.Y. 2017-18 and hear the appeal on merits of the case. Thanking You Yours faithfully For Ch. Lekh Raj Educational & Charitable Trust, (Satpal Singh), Secretary APPELLANT 3. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

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

condone the delay of 282 days in filing of appeal for the A.Y. 2017-18 and hear the appeal on merits of the case. Thanking You Yours faithfully For Ch. Lekh Raj Educational & Charitable Trust, (Satpal Singh), Secretary APPELLANT 3. With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253