HARI NARAYAN BORKATAKY,TINSUKIA vs. ITO WARD - 1, TINSUKIA, TINSUKIA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Hon'Ble Bench Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 R.W.S. 144 Read With Section 263 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Date Of The Order Passing The Appeal Order Is 14/05/2025. Being Aggrieved By The Order, The Appellant Wanted To Appeal Before The Hon'Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Due To Be Filed On Or Before 31Th July 2025. However, Due To Unavoidable Circumstances, The Appeal Was Filed Only On 9Th October, 2025 With A Delay Of 70 Days.

delay of 70 days which has been requested to be condoned as under: “The appellant has filed an appeal in Form 36 before the Hon'ble Bench against the order passed under Section 250 r.w.s. 144 read with section 263 read with section 144B

HARI NARAYAN BORKATAKY,TINSUKIA vs. ITO WARD - 1, TINSUKIA, TINSUKIA

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Hon'Ble Bench Against The Order Passed Under Section 250 R.W.S. 144 Read With Section 263 Read With Section 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Date Of The Order Passing The Appeal Order Is 14/05/2025. Being Aggrieved By The Order, The Appellant Wanted To Appeal Before The Hon'Ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Due To Be Filed On Or Before 31Th July 2025. However, Due To Unavoidable Circumstances, The Appeal Was Filed Only On 9Th October, 2025 With A Delay Of 70 Days.

delay of 70 days which has been requested to be condoned as under: “The appellant has filed an appeal in Form 36 before the Hon'ble Bench against the order passed under Section 250 r.w.s. 144 read with section 263 read with section 144B

TORSA MACHINES LIMITED,GUWAHATI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Him.

condoned as it was not explained with any cogent reasons. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed in limine. 1.2 The assessee has approached the ITAT against the impugned order with the following grounds: “1. That the Id. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC was not justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay in 1 filing the same, whereas

NEW TECH STEEL & ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED,ASSAM vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR-1, GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Hon'Ble Bench Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. As Per The Provisions Of Section 253(3), The Appeal Was Required To Be Filed On Or Before 11Th March, 2025. However, The Appeal Could Only Be Filed On 4Rd June, 2025, Resulting In A Delay Of 85 Days. The Reasons For The Delay Are Detailed Below: 1. That Due To Serious Health Condition, The Appellant Was Unable To Continue The Required Legal Proceedings As He Was A Prolonged Sufferer Of Acute Pancreatitis & Chronic Liver Disease (Cld), Both Of Which Significantly Compromised His

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The present appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), dated 10.01.2025, passed by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 2.1 In this case, the additions were made by the Ld. AO on account of violation

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.

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present appeal arises from the order under Section 250 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”) passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Central NER, Guwahati [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”], dated 18.03.2024. I.T.A. No. 283/GTY/2024 Pawan Communications Private Limited 2.1 In this case

DAMECHWA DHAR,JAINTIA HILLS vs. ACIT-CIR SHILLONG, SHILLONG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condone the delay and\nadjudicate the appeal.\n03. At the time of hearing neither the assessee nor the Id. AR appeared\nbefore the Bench to attend this appeal nor was any adjournment\napplication moved by the assessee. Therefore, this appeal is heard\nand disposed off with the assistance of Id. DR, who pointed out that\nthe assessee had not appeared

DUTTA ENTERPRISE,DIGBOI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, DIGBOI, DIGBOI

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

section 144B of the Act, dated 25.03.2022. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 353 days. An affidavit along with an application seeking condonation of delay

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, DIMAPUR, DIMAPUR, NAGALAND vs. IMKUMMONGLA PONGEN, SHILLONG

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The Revenue is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,66,07,000/- u/s 69A of the Income