PME POWER SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

condone the delay in removing the defects by the assessee u/s 139(9) and consider such returns as valid. 3. In pending cases as on date, where the defect specified u/s 139(9) of the Act has not been rectified by the assessee, the AD would be required to immediately initiate proceedings under section 144

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

SH. RAJ KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-34(5), DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue

Section 249(3) of the I.T. Act. The appeal is therefore not admitted and proceeded with, and therefore dismissed in limine. However, without any prejudice to the rejection of appellant's condonation of delay plea resulting in appeal being dismissed in limine, appellant's appeal is considered for disposal on facts of case as available on record and keeping

SH. RAJ KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-34(5), DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue

Section 249(3) of the I.T. Act. The appeal is therefore not admitted and proceeded with, and therefore dismissed in limine. However, without any prejudice to the rejection of appellant's condonation of delay plea resulting in appeal being dismissed in limine, appellant's appeal is considered for disposal on facts of case as available on record and keeping

EAST END APARTMENTS CGHS LTD,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 60(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed as above terms for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

condone the delay. 4. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before us and raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The CIT (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has grievously erred in law and on facts, confirming the order passed under section 144

DIVESH VERMA,BENGALURU vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD

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

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Divesh Verma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C-804, Veracious Vani Vilas Ward-1(1), Apartments, Doddaballapur Faridabad Main Road, Yelahanka, (Haryana) Bengalure-560064, Karnataka Pan: Aehpv6594H (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 90 of the Act read with CBDT Circular No. 333 dated 2nd April, 1982. The relief claimed was denied and TDS credit was not allowed in full as reflected in Form 26AS by then Ld. AO vide order dated 04.01.2020. 3. Against order dated 04.01.2020 of Ld. Assessing Officer, the appellant/assessee filed application for condonation of delay of 144

ANIL JAIN ,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year 2011-12

Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The assessee as per its grounds of appeal has raised several grievances. One of the grievance relates to adjudication of first appellate order ex-parte refusing to condone delay

AMIT GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(5), GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhryamit Gupta Vs. Ito D-63, Gf, Kaushambi, Ward-1(5), Ghaziabad, Up-201 012 Ghaziabad

condonation of delay filed by the appellant. 4. The Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 61,43,940/- without appreciating the fact that the Ld. AO passed order under section 144

DHARM PAL,ROHTAK, HARYANA vs. ITO WARD-1 , SONIPAT

In the result, the captioned appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purposes

delay is condoned, the Ld. CIT(A) is to decide the issues on merits.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "250", "147", "144

SHRI CHETAN SETH,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

The appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara\Nand\Nshri Brajesh Kumar Singh\Nita Nos.1808/Del/2023 & 2983, 2984 & 2985/Del/2015\N[Assessment Years: 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 & 2007-08]\Nshri Chetan Seth,\Nplot No.14, Lcs, Sector-B-1,\Nvasant Kunj,\Nnew Delhi-110070\Npan-Aolps2992A\Nappellant\Nincome Tax Officer,\Nward-15(3),\Nvs New Delhi\Nrespondent\Nappellant By\Nrespondent By\Nshri Arun Kishore, Ca &\Nshri Alok Suri, Ca\Nshri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr.\N(Dr)\Ndate Of Hearing\Ndate Of Pronouncement\N28.03.2025\N25.06.2025\Norder\Nper Brajesh Kumar Singh, Am,\Nthese Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The\Norder Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Delhi, Dated\N24.02.2015 For Ay 2004-05, 27.02.2015 For Ay 2005-06, 2006-07 And\N2007-08 Respectively Arising Out Of Assessment Orders Passed U/S 147/144\Nof The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To ‘The Act') Dated\N31.10.2011 For All The Above Assessment Years, Respectively. Since, The\Nissues Are Common & Connected, Hence, These Appeals Were Heard\Ntogether & Are Disposed Of By This Common Order.\N2. First, We Shall Take Up The Ita No.1808/Del/2023 Pertaining To Ay\N2004-05.\N2.

Condonation of delay in filing appeal due to alleged negligence of previous counsel. 2. Taxability of loan/advances as deemed dividend under Section 2(22)(e) in the hands of the shareholder. 3. Validity of reassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147 and Section 144

BRAHMDATT,GHAZIABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GHAZIABAD

Accordingly.\nThese assessee's twin appeals ITA Nos. 8208 &\n8209/Del/2025 are allowed for statistical purposes

144 of the Income-tax Act. There were delays of 587 days in filing the appeals.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeals in the larger interest of justice, considering the possibility of communication gaps. The Tribunal decided to restore the appeals back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.", "result": "Allowed", "sections

GOODVIEW TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,LAXMI NAGAR DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE NOIDA, NOIDA

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

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 153C r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the DCIT, Central Circle, Noida (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. AO’) pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12. 2. A search & seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 09/10/2013 on the premises of the assessee comprising Shubhkamna

HILLVIEW TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,LAXMI NAGAR DELHI vs. DCIT, NOIDA UTTAR PRADESH

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

Bench: Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2011-12]

Section 153C r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) passed by the DCIT, Central Circle, Noida (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Ld. AO’) pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12. 2. A search & seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was conducted on 09/10/2013 on the premises of the assessee comprising Shubhkamna

MOHAMMAD ASHFAQ,MEERUT vs. ITO WARD-2(2)(2), HAPUR

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandra

condone the delay of 167 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 27/03/2023 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144

DHANANJAY SANJOGTA FOUNDATION,NOIDA vs. CIT EXEMPTION, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, CIT EXEMPTION, LUCKNOW

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Naveen Chandra

condone the delay of 167 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 27/03/2023 under Section 147 r.w.s. 144

NEERAJ,FARIDABAD vs. ITO,WARD-2(1), FARIDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Amitabh Shukla, Accountnat Member

section 144 r.w.s. 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 pertaining to Assessment Year 2012-13. The word ‘Act’ herein this order would mean Income Tax Act, 1961. Since, both appeals pertain to the same assessee, they were heard together and are being adjudicated by this common order. ITA Nos.928 and 929/Del/2025 2. At the outset, we have noted that