SAQUIB AHMED,PIPARIYA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

147, Ward No.13,\nAbdullah Market,\nNehru Ward, Pipariya\nDistrict -Hoshangabad\n(Assessee/Appellant)\nPr. CIT-1\nBhopal\nबनाम/\nVs.\n(Revenue/Respondent)\nPAN: AKLPA7217L\nAssessee by Shri Milind Wadhwani, AR\nRevenue by Shri Anoop Singh, CIT-DR\nDate of Hearing 05.08.2025\nDate of Pronouncement 18.08.2025\nआदेश/ORDER\nPer Paresh M Joshi, J.M.:\nThis is an appeal filed by the Assessee Under Section

THE ACIT, CIRCLE 2(1), INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

condoned. 5 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 5. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of government works contract for construction of roads. The income-tax return of the assessee for the A.Y. 2010-11 was filed on 15.10.2010 declaring total income

THE ACIT, CENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. M/S SURYA INFRA VENTURE PVT. LTD., INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

condoned. 5 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 5. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of government works contract for construction of roads. The income-tax return of the assessee for the A.Y. 2010-11 was filed on 15.10.2010 declaring total income

THE AIT,ENTRAL-1, INDORE vs. SURYA INFRAVENTURE P LTD, INDORE

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

condoned. 5 Surya Infraventure ITA 216 of 2021 and others 5. Brief facts as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of government works contract for construction of roads. The income-tax return of the assessee for the A.Y. 2010-11 was filed on 15.10.2010 declaring total income

ABDE ALI,INDORE vs. ITO , BURHANPUR

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

147 r.w.s 144 as 24.03.2022. However, his claim regarding service of Notice of Demand on the said date is unsubstantiated. It is a fact that proceedings in the department have been digitized and service of statutory notices/orders etc. is done via digital platform on real-time basis. The contention of the appellant regarding such inordinate delay in receipt of order/notice

ABDE ALI,INDORE vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

147 r.w.s 144 as 24.03.2022. However, his claim regarding service of Notice of Demand on the said date is unsubstantiated. It is a fact that proceedings in the department have been digitized and service of statutory notices/orders etc. is done via digital platform on real-time basis. The contention of the appellant regarding such inordinate delay in receipt of order/notice

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

147 r.w.s. 144\n4\n596/Ind/2025\n2014-15\nOrder of first-appeal dated\n28.05.2024 passed by\nCIT(A), National Faceless\nAssessment-order\n347\ndated 15.09.2021\ndays\nAppeal Centre, bearing DIN:\npassed by AO,\nNational Faceless\nITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-\nAssessment Centre\n25/1065196538(1)\nu/s 144 r.w.s. 254\n2.\nSince these appeals involve identical facts and issues, they were heard\ntogether and are being disposed

RAJESH KUMAR RATHORE,SEHORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, SEHORE, SEHORE

condonation of\ndelay in filing the appeal against the penalty order\nRajesh Kumar Rathore 6\nITA No. 533/Ind/2025\ndated 25.09.2023, which was admittedly appealable\nup to 23.10.2023. The delay has been attributed to the\nappellant's lack of education and unawareness of the\nreassessment proceedings initiated under Section 147

INCOME TAX OFFICER-1(2), INDORE, INDORE vs. DIVINE INFRACREATION AND TRADING PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

Accordingly quash the assessment-order made by AO.\nThe assessee's ground is allowed

delayed return, the same cannot be\ncalled to be a non-est return in law.\n8. Having heard the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of\nthe orders of the lower authorities, we find that undisputedly the\nreturn was not filed by the assessee within the time prescribed\nunder section 148 of the Act. But for that reason

MAHESH KUMAR JAIN,VIDISHA vs. ITO, VIDISHA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay, citing \"sufficient cause\" and the principle of substantial justice over technicalities. The Tribunal found that the assessee's explanation for the delay was credible.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "147

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

condonation of delay. Citing various judicial precedents, the Tribunal held that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations of limitation.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "253(5) of the Income-tax Act", "250(6) of the Income-tax Act", "143(3)", "144", "147

KUNAL BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT ITD DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condonation of delay.\n3. Having explained delay aspect, Ld. AR went ahead to explain the issue\ninvolved in present matter. He drew us to assessment-order to show that the\nAO subjected assessee to the proceeding of section 147

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

147 r.w.s. 144\n4\n596/Ind/2025\n2014-15\nOrder of first-appeal dated\n28.05.2024 passed by\nCIT(A), National Faceless\nAssessment-order\n347\ndated 15.09.2021\ndays\npassed by AO,\nNational Faceless\nAppeal Centre, bearing DIN:\nITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-\n25/1065196538(1)\nAssessment Centre\nu/s 144 r.w.s. 254\n2. Since these appeals involve identical facts and issues, they were heard\ntogether and are being disposed

GORELAL PARMAR,BHOPAL vs. ITO 2(5), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Gorelal Parmar, Ito 2(5), 8, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal Arvind Vihar, Vs. Baghugliya, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bkxpp3183R Assessee By S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2024 O R D E R

Section 249(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 5.2 Thus due to the reasons of not filing the application for condonation of delay the CIT(A) has declined to condone the delay in filing the appeal. It is pertinent to note that CIT(A) has not issued any notice to the assessee much less a show cause notice before

DHARMENDRA KUMAR,KHANDWA vs. ITO, KHANDWA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Section 147, initiated due to non-compliance with notices. The assessee's first appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed due to a delay of 122 days.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned

DILIP BUDHADEV,INDORE, MADHYA PRADESH vs. THE ITO, SENDHWA, SENDHWA, MADHYA PRADESH

In the result appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical\npurpose

delay was condoned, and the matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh order on merits.", "result": "Remanded", "sections": ["253", "147

RAJESH KUMAR RATHORE,SEHORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 5, SEHORE, SEHORE

In the result, the impugned order is set aside as & by way of\nremand back to the file of the Ld

147 r.w.s. 144 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961.\n- The appellant has sought condonation of delay in filing\nthe appeal against the assessment order dated\n06.03.2023, which was admittedly appealable up to\n06.04.2023. The delay has been attributed to the\nappellant's lack of education and unawareness of the\nreassessment proceedings initiated under Section

KUSUM GEORGE JACOB,BHOPAL vs. ITO - 2(1) BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay. The Tribunal also noted that certain documents were presented by the assessee's representative, which were not filed before the AO or examined by the CIT(A).", "result": "Allowed for statistical purpose", "sections": [ "147