SHRI KISHAN YADAV,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condone the delay and also remand this matter back\nto the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh in accordance with section 250(6

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

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.\nPage 6 of 9\nAnil Turakhia\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025-\nAYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15\n5.\nLd. AR next submitted that the section 250

VIJAY KOTHARI,INDORE vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE

6)\nGuard File\nPage 25 of 25\nBy order\nSr. Private Secretary\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore", "summary": { "facts": "The assessee filed an appeal after a delay of 382 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to non-receipt of hearing notices and the impugned order by the CIT(A) on the correct email ID. The transaction

PRABHA TRIPATHI L/R OF LATE RAGHAV RAM TRIPATHI,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condone the\ndelays and remand these matters back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication\nafresh in accordance with section 250(6) after giving necessary opportunity\nto L/R.\n5. Ld. DR for revenue fairly agreed to the submissions and prayer of Ld.\nAR.\n6. We have considered above submissions of both sides. We find that the\nissue of delays

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

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.\nPage 6 of 9\nAnil Turakhia\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025-\nAYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15\n5.\nLd. AR next submitted that the section 250

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

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.\nPage 6 of 9\nAnil Turakhia\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025-\nAYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15\n5.\nLd. AR next submitted that the section 250

MAMTA DHOLPURE,INDORE vs. ITO 3(3), INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding a sufficient cause for the delay. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without properly adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee.", "result": "Remanded", "sections": [ "143(3)", "250(6

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

250 dated 21.06.2024 specifically pointing out this discrepancy of delay in filing appeal has not been complied with by the appellant. The query raised vide notice dated 21.06.2024 is as follows:- "On perusal of the appeal memo, it is noticed that in your case assessment order was passed on 24.03.2022 and appeal was filed on 18.10.2023. Thus, it is evident

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

250 dated 21.06.2024 specifically pointing out this discrepancy of delay in filing appeal has not been complied with by the appellant. The query raised vide notice dated 21.06.2024 is as follows:- "On perusal of the appeal memo, it is noticed that in your case assessment order was passed on 24.03.2022 and appeal was filed on 18.10.2023. Thus, it is evident

KAMLESH MOTWANI,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-2(1),BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with\nhearing.\n4.\nLd. AR for assessee submits that the section 250(6) of the Income

KUSUM YADAV,INDORE vs. PCIT (1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

Bench: Sh. Bagirath Mal Biyani & Sh. Udayan Das Gupta

250(6) of the Act, which was dismissed by the Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 30th November, 2023, and the assessee proceeded to file second appeal before the tribunal against the said order on 12th December, 2023. 6.3 On seeing the negative outcome of the appeal before the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee (by way of a precaution) thought

RAMRATI SAHU,BHOPAL vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay. The appeal was admitted for hearing.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "263", "143(3)", "54B", "253(5)", "250(6

PRABHA TRIPATHI L/R OF LATE RAGHAV RAM TRIPATHI,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -2(4), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

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

condone the delays and remand these matters back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh in accordance with section 250(6

RAVINDRA AWASTHI,INDORE vs. ITO 2(1), INDORE

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with\nhearing.\n4. Ld. AR for assessee submits that the section 250(6) of the Income

SANJAY MUKATI,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(1), MAIN BUILDING INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble\Nand\Nshri B.M. Biyani\Nita No.510/Ind/2025\N Assessment Year:2012-13\Nsanjay Mukati,\N225, Tanki Chowk,\Nbijalpur,\Nindore\N(Assessee/Appellant)\Nito 2(1)\Nindore\Nबनाम /\Nvs.\N(Revenue/Respondent)\Npan: Bcepm6423N\Nassessee By Shri Rishikesh Mishra, Ar\Nrevenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr\Ndate Of Hearing\N11.12.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement\N23.12.2025\Nआदेश / Order\Nper B.M. Biyani, A.M.:\Nfeeling Aggrieved By Order Of First-Appeal Dated 13.02.2025 Passed By\Nlearned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)"] Which\Nin Turn Arises Out Of Assessment-Order Dated 27.12.2019 Passed By Learned\Nito-2(4), Indore [“Ao”] U/S 143(3) R.W.S.147 Of Income-Tax Act, 1961 [“The\Nact"] For Assessment-Year [“Ay"] 2012-13, The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal\Non The Grounds Mentioned In Appeal Memo (Form No. 36).\Nsanjay Mukati\Nita No. 510/Ind/2025 - Ay 2012-13\N2. The Registry Has Informed That The Present Appeal Is Delayed By 31\Ndays & Therefore Time-Barred. Ld. Ar For Assessee Submitted That The\Nassessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported By\Naffidavit; The Affidavit Filed By Assessee Is Scanned & Re-Produced For An\Nimmediate Reference:\Nभारतीय गैर न्यायिक\Nएक सौ रुपये\Nrs.100\None\Nhundred Rupees\Nvijay Dewang\Nindore (M.P.)\Nreg. No. 14494\Nexpiry Dt. 11/09/2029\Ngov\Nof\Nindia Non Noted Registered\Nमध्य प्रदेश Madhya Pradesh\Notary\Nvijay Dewang\Nindore (M.P.)\Nreg. No. 14484\Nexpiry Dt. 11/09/2029\Ned\Nserial No. .......\Ndate..

condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause. The Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) because it did not state the points for determination, decision, and reasons as required by Section 250(6

NEEL KUMAR AJMERA ,INDORE vs. THE A.C.I.T 4 (1), INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay due to Covid-\n19 pandemic, meaning thereby only 990 days remained to be\nexplained.\"\n\n7. Thus, with reference to above facts/documents, Ld. AR contended\nthat the impugned order passed by CIT(A) is neither in conformity with the\nprovisions of section 250(6

KAILASH BAND,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(1), INDORE

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Kailash Band, Nfac/Ito, 01,Balgara, 1(1), बनाम/ Sanwer, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Bxtpk4018B Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 17.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 17.01.2024

condone delay and admit this appeal. At the same time, we also find that the CIT(A) has passed ex-parte order dismissing appeal of assessee for non-prosecution but without adjudicating assessee’s grounds as per mandate of section 250(6

MADHYA PRADESH POLICE HOUSING CORPORATION LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay in filing the appeal after considering the submissions of the assessee and the revenue. The Tribunal then decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "254", "154", "250(6