KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

Delay condoned. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) passed by the High Court. In view of this, we find no merit in the appeals and special leave petitions. Accordingly, the appeals and special leave petitions are dismissed.” 25. The doctrine of merger results

RAJESH AGGARWAL ,DEHRADUN vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

condone the delay and admit the appeals of the assessee for adjudication. 2. As identical issues are involved in all these appeals, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. AY: 2011-12 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: That the Order passed

GYANENDRA PANWAR,DEHRADUN vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shr Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.238/Ddn/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Gyanendra Panwar, Assistant Director Of Income Nanda Devi Enclave, Badripur, Vs. Tax, Cpc,Ito,Ward 1(3)(4), Dehradun-248005, Uttarakhand. Aaykar Bhawan, 16, Civil Lines, Pan No.Adipp2853R Near Iit Roorkee, Uttarakhand. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

36, is being filed herewith.” 1.1 Considering the reasons given in the above said application, we hereby condone the delay and admit this appeal for adjudication. 2. This appeal arises from order dated 29.03.2024, passed by Addl./JCIT(Appeals)-1, Ludhiana u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as “the Act”). In this case, the assessee

LOKESH KUMAR, PROP.,KOTDWAR vs. ITO, KOTDWAR

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2011-12 Lokesh Kumar, Prop. Versus Income-Tax Officer, Ramesh Kumar Verma, Adv. Kotdwar. Durgapuri, Kotdwar. Pan: Ajrpk2548R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.06.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.06.2023 Order This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against Order Dated

2. There is a delay of 139 days in filing the appeal. After perusing the explanation furnished by the assessee seeking condonation of delay, we are satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal was due to reasonable cause. Accordingly, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. When the matter was called out, none

NAINITAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,HALDWANI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, HALDWANI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

condonation petition giving the reasons for the delay. This appeal has been listed for hearing on 27.07.2021, 28.09.2021, 01.12.2021, 08.02.2022, 27.04.2022, 29.06.2022, 23.08.2022, 12.10.2022, 20.02.2023, 20.06.2023, 25.07.2023, 20.09.2023 and on 19.10.2023. On none of these occasions, there was any representation from the side of the assessee nor any adjournment request has been filed. The Ld. DR also placed on record

NAINITAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,HALDWANI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, HALDWANI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

condonation petition giving the reasons for the delay. This appeal has been listed for hearing on 27.07.2021, 28.09.2021, 01.12.2021, 08.02.2022, 27.04.2022, 29.06.2022, 23.08.2022, 12.10.2022, 20.02.2023, 20.06.2023, 25.07.2023, 20.09.2023 and on 19.10.2023. On none of these occasions, there was any representation from the side of the assessee nor any adjournment request has been filed. The Ld. DR also placed on record