SRI PICKLU PAUL,KARIMGANJ vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SILCHAR, SILCHAR

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

Bench: Sri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Sri Rakesh Mishra

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Shillong is not justified in dismissing the grounds taken by the Appellant before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

AMAR CHAND GANGWAL,GUWAHATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Your Honour Under Section 253(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Challenging The Order Dated 17.12.2024 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Said Act By The Ld. Addl/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -1, Noida For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. I Respectfully Submit That The Appeal Could Not Be Filed Within The Prescribed Time Due To Unavoidable Circumstances & Difficulties Beyond My Control. The Appeal Was Due To Be Filed On Or Before 28.02.2025. There Is Delay Of 95 Days Only In Filing Of The Appeal. 3. I Am Aged About 81 Years & I Am Not Conversant With E-Mail, Digital / Internet

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present appeal arises from the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 17.12.2024, passed by the Ld. Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, NOIDA [hereafter “the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)]. In this case, the assessee is seen to have filed

ARECA GLOBAL ASSOCIATES PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, BENGALURU

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The

addition significantly affects the financial position of the Appellant Company. In Sri Channabasaveshwara Swamy Rural v. ITO (Exemptions) ITA Nos. 582- 592/Bang/2023, the Bangalore ITAT held that delays should be condoned when the assessment involves a substantial financial burden. C. Principles of Natural Justice Violated: The Supreme Court in Suraj Mall Mohta & Co. v. A.V. Visvanathasastri held that income

D P SCHOOL SOCIETY,NAGALAND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, JURISDICTION WARD TWO(THREE)

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The First Appellate Authority. Before The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), The Assessee Gave The Reasons For Said Delay As Under:

Additional/ Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals),1, Delhi (hereafter “the Addl./JCIT(A]. 1.1 In this case, there was apparently a delay of 969 days in the filing of the appeal before the First Appellate Authority. Before the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A), the assessee gave the reasons for said delay as under: I.T.A. No. 136/GTY/2025 D P School Society

SUMAN AHMED,GAURIPUR vs. ITO, WARD- DHUBRI, DHUBRI

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Manomohan Dasआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.45/Gty/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18

Income-tax Rules, 1962. 8. In the light of above discussion and applying the principles enunciated in the above judgments, we are of the firm opinion that delay of 98 days in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A) deserves to be condoned. We therefore condone the delay of 98 days before the ld.NFAC. In view thereof, without dwelling into merits

SHIWAJI PD. JAISWAL,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A) explaining the reason for delay in filing the appeal of 1862 days delay which is as under: "Dear Sir, Sub: Prayer for condonation of delay in filing appeal for the assessment year 2018-19 against the Assessment Order issued U/s. 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

condoning the delay of 1862 days and not deciding the issue on merits. 2 Shiwaji Pd. Jaiswal 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 30.09.2018 declaring gross total income of Rs. 10,17,148/-. The return was processed on 30.07.2019 making the addition

SANDEEP JALAN,GUWAHATI vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A), Dated 08.12.2023, Under The Income Tax Act, 1961. 1. Period Of Delay: There Is A Delay Of 494 Days In Filing The Said Appeal

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present appeal arises from the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 08.12.2023, passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)]. 2.1 Brief facts of the case are that

MAHABHAIRAV AUTO LLP,TEZPUR vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) Where The Assessee Could Not Succeed Mainly On The Ground That There Was A Delay Of 144 Days In Filing Of The First Appeal, Which Was Not

Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 29.08.2024 for AY 2018-19. 1.1 In this case, several additions were made by the Learned Assessing Officer in a more or less exparte manner. 1.2 The additions made by the Ld. AO were agitated before the Ld. CIT(A) where the assessee

RAJULHOUBIENUO ANGAMI,NAGALAND vs. ITO WARD 2, DIMAPUR

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: This Hon'Ble Tribunal Assailing The Order Dated 24.06.2024 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) ["Ld. Cit(A)"]. That The Due Date For Filing The Appeal Was 24Th August, 2024. However, There Has Been An Unintentional Delay Of 166 Days (Upto 13Th February, 2025), In Filing The Present Appeal, For Which The Appellant, With Utmost Humility, Seeks The Indulgence Of This Hon'Ble Tribunal For Condonation Of The Said Delay On The Grounds Set Forth Herein. 2. It Is Submitted That The Mr. Shivendu Maharaj Is The Accountant Of The Appellant Who Looks After The Tax Portal & Email Updates. The Accountant Also Forwards The Needful To The Chartered Accountant, Mr. Ajit Jain, To Take Necessary Action In Response To Any Notice That Is Received.

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. I.T.A. No. 26/GTY/2025 Rajulhoubienuo Angami 2. The present appeal emanates from the order under Section 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”], dated 24.06.2024. 2.1 In this

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumar

income by not condoning the delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 9. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the facts of this case qua the addition

ABCI INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri Rajesh Kumar

income by not condoning the delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 9. After hearing the rival contentions and perusing the material on record, we find that the facts of this case qua the addition

PAWAN COMMUNICATIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,GUWAHATI ASSAM vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, GUWAHATI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [ITAT for short hereafter] expired on 17.05.2024. There is therefore a delay of about 211 (two hundred eleven) days or more till date in submitting the appeal before the said learned Tribunal.

condonation of delay, as supported by a duly sworn affidavit. 4. That the aforesaid delay in submitting the appeal u/s 253 has arisen because of sufficient cause, and the sequence of the events leading to the delay has been as described below: (a) The memorandum of appeal was required to be submitted by 17.05.2074, 1.c. within 60(sixty) days

ARUP BAKSHI,BONGAIGAON vs. ITO, WARD -1, BONGAIGAON, BONGAIGAON

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making Computation of Tax on income of Rs.26,24,091/- even after making assessment order u/s 143(3) on returned income

RAKESH CHANDRA SHIL SARMA,BELONIA vs. ITO WARD UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

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

addition at the rate of 8% on total deposits in the bank as made by the Id. AO and assessed the income.\n3. The assessee is engaged in the business of sale of tickets/ booking and therefore, these payments are made to the Air Lines travel agent and hotels, etc. therefore, the entire deposit into the bank did not represent

ANJAN KUMAR PAUL,HAILKANDI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

condone such delay in filing of the appeals by the assessee. 4. The similar issues are involved in all the appeals filed by the assessee. Therefore, we have taken ITA No. 206 / GTY / 2025 for adjudication and our observations will cover all the appeals filed by the assessee. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee

ANJAN KUMAR PAUL,CACHAR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

condone such delay in filing of the appeals by the assessee. 4. The similar issues are involved in all the appeals filed by the assessee. Therefore, we have taken ITA No. 206 / GTY / 2025 for adjudication and our observations will cover all the appeals filed by the assessee. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee

ANJAN KUMAR PAUL,HAILAKANDI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

condone such delay in filing of the appeals by the assessee. 4. The similar issues are involved in all the appeals filed by the assessee. Therefore, we have taken ITA No. 206 / GTY / 2025 for adjudication and our observations will cover all the appeals filed by the assessee. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee

ANJAN KUMAR PAUL,HAILAKANDI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Hon’Ble

condone such delay in filing of the appeals by the assessee. 4. The similar issues are involved in all the appeals filed by the assessee. Therefore, we have taken ITA No. 206 / GTY / 2025 for adjudication and our observations will cover all the appeals filed by the assessee. 5. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee