NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

condonation of delay in filing form 10CCB without first considering the proviso (b) to section 119(1). 3. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A) FARIDABAD, NFAC summarily rejected the appeal mechanically without going through the various case laws/ judgments of Apex Court/High Court ITAT submitted in the grounds of appeal before her. Therefore, severe manifest error occurred in her impugned order

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

condonation of delay in filing form 10CCB without first considering the proviso (b) to section 119(1). 3. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A) FARIDABAD, NFAC summarily rejected the appeal mechanically without going through the various case laws/ judgments of Apex Court/High Court ITAT submitted in the grounds of appeal before her. Therefore, severe manifest error occurred in her impugned order

NAGAHAT TEA ESTATE PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1, JORHAT

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

condonation of delay in filing form 10CCB without first considering the proviso (b) to section 119(1). 3. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A) FARIDABAD, NFAC summarily rejected the appeal mechanically without going through the various case laws/ judgments of Apex Court/High Court ITAT submitted in the grounds of appeal before her. Therefore, severe manifest error occurred in her impugned order

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

2. The registry has noted that, there are delays of 115 / 116 days in filing of the captioned appeals in the Tribunal by the assessee. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and we 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

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

2. The registry has noted that, there are delays of 115 / 116 days in filing of the captioned appeals in the Tribunal by the assessee. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and we 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

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

2. The registry has noted that, there are delays of 115 / 116 days in filing of the captioned appeals in the Tribunal by the assessee. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and we 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

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

2. The registry has noted that, there are delays of 115 / 116 days in filing of the captioned appeals in the Tribunal by the assessee. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and we 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

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

2. The registry has noted that, there are delays of 115 / 116 days in filing of the captioned appeals in the Tribunal by the assessee. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and we 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

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

2. The registry has noted that, there are delays of 115 / 116 days in filing of the captioned appeals in the Tribunal by the assessee. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and we 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

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

2. The registry has noted that, there are delays of 115 / 116 days in filing of the captioned appeals in the Tribunal by the assessee. The assessee prayed for condonation of delay and we 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