SHIBU ROY,RONGPUR, CACHAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, SILCHAR, SILCHAR

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) As Under:

section 144 of the Act passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer. 1.1 In all these 4 appeals, the common ground is that there was delay in filing of appeals ranging from 58 days to 758 days before the Ld. CIT(A) as under: (a) ITA No. 297/Gty/2025- delayed by 758 days (reasons given by the assessee for the said delay

SHIBU ROY,RONGPUR, CACHAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, SILCHAR, SILCHAR

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The Ld. Cit(A) As Under:

section 144 of the Act passed by the Ld. Assessing Officer. 1.1 In all these 4 appeals, the common ground is that there was delay in filing of appeals ranging from 58 days to 758 days before the Ld. CIT(A) as under: (a) ITA No. 297/Gty/2025- delayed by 758 days (reasons given by the assessee for the said delay

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

condoned as under: “1. The above appeal has been filed before 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

ITO(EXEMPTION), WARD-2(4), SHILLONG, SHILLONG vs. NORTH EAST SOCIETY OF SISTERS OF THE HOLY CROSS, MEGHALAYA

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

condonation of delay prior to processing of return. 3. For that the learned CIT(A) was not justified in holding that the exemption claimed falls under sec. 143(1)(a)(ii)-Incorrect claim. 4. For that the learned CIT(A) was not justified in not allowing Capital Expenditure incurred for the objects of society. 5. The Appellant craves leave

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, DIGBOI, DIGBOI vs. ARUNACHAL TEA COMPANY, MARGHERITA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed while the CO of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Manomohan Das & Sri Rakesh Mishra

4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) NFAC has erred in deleting the disallowance made u/s 80-IE of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when as per sub-section 6 of section 801E of IT Act 1961 read with sub- section 7 of section 80-IA, it is mandatory to furnish form 10CCB before

PURVANCHAL CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,GUWAHATI, ASSAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3) (EXEMP), WARD-2(3) (EXEMP), GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

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

4. As the appellant had been engaged in charitable activities since its inception and continued with such activities and also had the aforementioned provisional registration, it was eligible to file an application for regular approval under clause (iii) of the first proviso to Section 80G(5) of the Act, and accordingly, filed Form 10AB under the said clause on 18/08/2022

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

section 115BBE of the Act. 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld.NFAC but with a delay of 98 days. The ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning the delay. Suman Ahmed 4. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the impugned order. 5

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: The

condoning the said delay and hence, he has dismissed the appeal in limine. Considering the totality of facts and circumstances, we are persuaded by the arguments of Ld. AR that in the interests of substantive justice, another opportunity should be provided to the assessee for presenting the facts. However, since even before us there is no written submission about

MAYURPLY INDUSTRIES PVT LTD.,HOOGHLY, WEST BENGAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE 3, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

In the result IT(SS)A Nos

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Manomohan Das, Jm

5) of the Act, the Tribunal has the power to admit the appeal even after expiry of the period referred to in sub-section (3) & (4) of Section 253 of the Act if the Tribunal is satisfied that there were sufficient causes and reasons for not presenting the appeals within the stipulated period. The Ld. A.R submitted that since

MEGHALAYA CO-OP. APEX BANK LIMITED,SHILLONG vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-SHILLONG, SHILLONG

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

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarmaassessment Year: 2011-12 Meghalaya Co-Op. Apex Assistant Commissioner Of Bank Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle - Shillong Vs. M. G. Road, Shillong- 793001 (Pan: Aaam8227G) (Appellant) (Respondent)

5. Moreover, the Ld. AR submitted that the delay of 522 days arose in filing the appeal because during the intervening period the assessee had taken steps by initiating the provisions of section 154 of the Act and thereafter the assessee had filed separate appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) on the same ground and as such delay was happened

EDUCATION INDIA, SHILLONG,SHILLONG vs. ITO, WARD-1, SHILLONG

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

Bench: Shri Manomohan Das & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 253(5) so the petition for condonation of delay of 19 days in filing the appeal could not be made along with filing of appeal on 18.01.2025 in Form No.36 with requisite papers & evidences. Prayer is therefore made before the Hon’ble Bench to kindly consider the prayer of the Undersigned sympathetically & to admit the appeal and for this

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:

section 249(3) of the Act, the Ld. AR mentioned that due to a communication gap between the AR of the assessee and the assessee himself, appropriate compliance could not be made. The Ld. AR pleaded from an opportunity to present the facts before the First Appellate Authority. 2.1 The Ld. DR relied on the orders of authorities below

SPECIAL JUDGE ASSAM GUWAHATI,GUWAHATI vs. ITO-TDS2, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble

section 234E, contending that it is ultra vires and illegal. 3. The learned CIT(A) vide order dated 31.12.2024 dismissed the appeal of the assessee citing the reason that appeal was filed after a delay of approximately 7 years and 6 months and there was lack of sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed

SPECIAL JUDGE ASSAM GUWAHATI,GUWAHATI vs. ITO-TDS2, GUWAHATI

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

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon’Ble

section 234E, contending that it is ultra vires and illegal. 3. The learned CIT(A) vide order dated 31.12.2024 dismissed the appeal of the assessee citing the reason that appeal was filed after a delay of approximately 7 years and 6 months and there was lack of sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed

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

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.

5. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submission made before the Ld. CIT(A) explaining the reasons cited hereinabove and there 4 Shiwaji Pd. Jaiswal was no malafide intention of the assessee for non filing appeal within the due date. The Tax Auditor had reported wrongly in Form No.3CD. at clause No. 26(B)(b) of section

ADARSHA SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITTEE,NAGAON vs. ITO, WARD-NAGAON, NAGAON

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahui.T.A. No. 331/Gty/2025 Assessment Year: 2021-2022 Adarsha Samaj Kalyan Samittee,.....……..Appellant Belaguri Natun Bazar, P.O. Solmari, P.S. Rupahi, Solmari B.O., Sastri Nagar, Nagaon-782002, Assam [Pan:Aabaa1582B] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………..……………..…...Respondent Ward-Nagaon, Rkb Road, Hazibergaon, Nagaon, Nagoon-782001, Assam Appearances By: Shri Anil Jha, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Santosh Kumar Karnani, Addl. Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: January 05, 2026 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: January 22, 2026 O R D E R

delay is condoned. 4. At the time of hearing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the ld. CIT(Appeals) has passed the order ex-parte as the assessee failed to produce satisfactory documentary evidences in support of his claim inspite of sufficient opportunities given. He also submitted that even the assessment order has been passed under section 147/144

SHRI ASHISH KUMAR DEY,DHARMANAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-SILCHAR, SILCHAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble & Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Blei.T.A. No. 120/Gty/2011 Block Year: 01/04/1989 To 08/12/1999 Shri Subhash Chandra Dey Assistant Commissioner Of Office-Tilla Vs Income Tax, Circle-Silchar Dharmanagar -799250 Tripura [Pan: Acrpd1916F] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent)

5. The ld. Counsel for the assessee raised a preliminary objection that the assessment orders are time barred. This additional ground was raised before the Division Bench in the quantum appeal but this ground has been rejected by the Bench by observing as under:- “3. Before we proceed, learned authorized representative has sought to raise assessee's additional ground challenging