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

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. When the matter was called out, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite notice of hearing, being issued through registered post. The basic grievance of the assessee as per the grounds raised is against ex parte disposal of his appeal by learned first appellate authority. 4. Briefly

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

SANJAY KUMAR ANAND ,DEHRADUN vs. DDIT/ADIT (INTL) , DEHRADUN

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA (Judicial Member), SHRI MANISH AGARWAL (Accountant Member)

Delay of 33 days in filing the asseessee’s instant appeal is condoned in larger interest of justice and in light of Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC). 3. We notice during the course of hearing that the assessee/appellant has raised his sole substantive grievance challenging correctness of both the learned lower authorities’ action