VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3.Since the issue for adjudication in these appeals is identical; they were heard together at the request of parties and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience, brevity and clarity. 4. The background facts leading to these appeals are such that the asesesee was a director

VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeals are allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3.Since the issue for adjudication in these appeals is identical; they were heard together at the request of parties and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience, brevity and clarity. 4. The background facts leading to these appeals are such that the asesesee was a director

PRATHMIK KRSHI SHAK SAHKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT KHATEDAKALA,KHATEDAKALA vs. CIT, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani\Nand\Nshri Paresh M. Joshi\Nita No. 702/Ind/2024\N Assessment Year:2018-19\Nprathmik Krshi Shak\Nnfac\Nsahkari Sanstha Maryadit,\Ndelhi\Nkhatedakala,\Nsarra, Distt-Sarra,\Nबनाम /\Nvs.\Nbetul\N(Assessee/Appellant)\N(Revenue/Respondent)\Npan: Aacap7241F\Nassessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ar\Nrevenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr\Ndate Of Hearing 24.07.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement 28.07.2025\Nआदेश / Order\Nper B.M. Biyani, A.M.:\Nfeeling Aggrieved By Order Of First-Appeal Dated 16.04.2024 Passed By\Nlearned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)"] Which\Nin Turn Arises Out Of Assessment-Order Dated 17.03.2023 Passed By Learned\Nassessment Unit Of Income-Tax Department [“Ao”] U/S 147 R.W.S.144 &\N144B Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act"] For Assessment-Year [“Ay"] 2018-19,\Nthe Assessee Has Filed This Appeal On The Grounds Mentioned In Appeal\Nmemo (Form No. 36).\Nprathmik Krshi Shak Sahkari Sanstha Maryadit Khatedakala\Nita No. 702/Ind/2024 - Ay 2018-19\N2. Ld. Ar For Assessee Submitted That The Impugned Order Was Passed On\N16.04.2024 But The Same Came To The Knowledge Of Assessee On 17.07.2024\Nand Therefore The Assessee Has Mentioned The \"Date Of Service\" As\N“17.07.2024\" In Form No.

condonation of delay in filing the\nappeal against order under Section 250 of the Income\ntax Act, 1961 \"the Act\"\nMost Respectfully sheweth,\nThe Appellant is a society in a remote and small village of Khatedkala in\nthe district of Betul. For the year under consideration the appeal was filed\nbefore CIT(A) which was filed vide Form 35 dated

MANOHAR SINGH THAKUR,S/O SHRI ANAR SINGH THAKUR, VILLAGE BANWARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SEHORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2012-13 Manohar Singh Thakur, Ito S/O Shri Anar Singh Sehore बनाम/ Thakur, Village Banwari Vs. Kalan Tehsil-Ashta (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Agxpt9481F Assessee By Shri Soumya, Bumb, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 21.01.2026

246 days and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed a condonation-application/affidavit. Referring to contents of above, Ld. AR submitted that the assessee has been suffering from serious heart-related disease. Ld. AR has filed a bunch of medical reports of different hospitals/doctors to substantiate the factum of assessee’s illness. Thus

NEHA TAMRAKAR,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 5 (1), BHOPAL

In the result, the “Impugned Order” is set aside as & by

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshineha Tamrakar, Ito -5(1), बनाम/ 177 A Sector, Indrapuri Bhopal. Vs. Bhopal(M.P.) (Pan: Ajtpt6475G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 12.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 16.01.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

246 A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “Impugned Order” has dismissed the first appeal of the assessee on the Page 4 of 13 Neha Tamrakar ITA No. 175/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2009-10 grounds & reasons stated therein. The core grounds & reasons for the dismissal of the first appeal are as under:- “In the original grounds of appeal

KAMLESH KOUSHAL,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 1(2), INDORE

246(5)\nread with e-Appeal Scheme, 2023 deserves to be\nquashed / set aside.\n2. That, the Hon'ble AddI / JCIT (Appeal) has erred in law\nin passing the impugned order dated 28/03/2025\nwithout giving an opportunity of personal hearing as\nprovided in clause 13 of e-Appeal Scheme, 2023 despite\nspecific request made by the appellant and therefore,\nthe

RANVEER SINGH SURYAWANSHI,DHAR vs. ITO DHAR, DHAR

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

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshiranveer Singh Suryawanshi, Ito, Dhar बनाम/ Datwada Datwade, Vs. Indore, Mp (Pan:Awlps7673N) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ajay Tulsiyan,Ca & Ruchira Singhal, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

246 A of the act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the first appeal of the assessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The core grounds and reasons for the dismissal of the first appeal was as under:- 2.1 As per Form No.35, the date of service of Demand Notice is stated

MANSOOR MIRZA ,JAORA vs. ITO, NEEMUCH , NEEMUCH

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanimansoor Mirza Ito 110, Chhawani Jaora Dewas Vs. Jaora (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Angpm9218H Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2024

246 (Allahabad) and submitted that the Hon’ble High Court has held that mere uploading on portal does not amount to service and issue of an order. Thus, he has pleaded that the delay of 50 days in filing the present appeal may be condoned and the appeal of the assessee be admitted for adjudication on merits

DCIT 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S MAA UMIYA AGRITECH PVT. LTD. , INDORE

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit 1(1) M/S. Maa Umiya Agritech Pvt. Ltd. Indore 119, A.B. Road, Aloo Pyaj Mandi, Vs. Indore (Appellant / (Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn8230F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2023

condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” Accordingly, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in suo- moto cognizance for extension of the limitation, the appeal of the revenue is treated as filed within the period of limitation. 3. The Revenue has raised following ground of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deleting