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

Appeals are allowed

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

253(5) and the Page 2 of 24 Shri Vimal Todi ITA Nos. 188 to 190/Ind/2024 - AY 2012-13 to 2014-15 decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, 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

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

Appeals are allowed

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

253(5) and the Page 2 of 24 Shri Vimal Todi ITA Nos. 188 to 190/Ind/2024 - AY 2012-13 to 2014-15 decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, 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

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

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

c)]. By virtue of section 253(3) of the Act every\nappeal under subsection (1) shall be filed within sixty days of\nthe date on which the order sought to be appealed against is\ncommunicated to the assessee. Further by virtue of section\n253(5) the appellate Tribunal may admit an appeal after the\nexpiry of 60 days

BMG CALCUTTAWALA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. AO CPC (TDS), ITO TDS(1) INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed\"

253 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for\nsake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by\nthe order bearing Number ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-\n25/1071072719(1) dated 10.12.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)\nu/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the\n\"Impugned order”. The relevant Assessment Year

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

c) and consulted with a different counsel for filing of appeals in penalty matters that the assessee came to know that the counsel had not filed appeals against impugned orders. Immediately thereafter, the assessee Page 6 of 16 C.I. Builders Private Limited, Bhopal ITA Nos. 247 & 248/Ind/2023 A.Y.2010-11 & 2012-13 arranged to file these appeals on 03.07.2023 alongwith appeals

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT, 1(2), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

c) and consulted with a different counsel for filing of appeals in penalty matters that the assessee came to know that the counsel had not filed appeals against impugned orders. Immediately thereafter, the assessee Page 6 of 16 C.I. Builders Private Limited, Bhopal ITA Nos. 247 & 248/Ind/2023 A.Y.2010-11 & 2012-13 arranged to file these appeals on 03.07.2023 alongwith appeals

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

c), 271F & 271 (1) (b)\nof the Act. Copy of such penalty order is marked as Annexure (A/4)\nImmediately upon gaining such knowledge, she contacted another legal\ncounsel and took prompt steps to obtain relevant records and prefer the\npresent Appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal without any further delay.\n10. That, the delay of 342 days has thus occurred

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

253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience & brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .In the ITA No:- 647/Ind/2025 the Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/250/2024-25/1066202361(1) dated 28.06.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which

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

253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience & brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .In the ITA No:- 647/Ind/2025 the Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/250/2024-25/1066202361(1) dated 28.06.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

c) of the Income Tax Act. This message caused significant concern and\nconfusion. Immediately thereafter, I approached to my consultant to understand the\nsituation. Upon consultation, he too expressed unawareness of the developments,\nattributing it to his inactive email account. Immediately my consultant login at ITD\nPortal and came to know about the ex-parte appellate order passed

KALPANA NARWARE,BETUL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BETUL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

C) No. 3 of 2020\nread with Misc. Applications for filing of appeals w.e.f. 15.03.2020 under\nall laws. Therefore, considering the entire conspectus of matter, the CIT(A)\nought to have judiciously considered the reasoning explained by assessee.\nWe find that section 249(3) empowers the CIT(A) to admit an appeal after\nexpiry of prescribed time, if there

KISHORE SEWANI,BHOPAL vs. ITO-1(4), BHOPAL

Appeals are allowed for statistical\npurposes

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we\ntake a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with\nhearing.\n6.\nOn merit of case, Ld. AR submits that the assessee is ready and\nwilling to make a proper representation before CIT(A) if an opportunity is\ngiven and prays that the present matter should

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

253(1)( c), against an order passed by the ld. PCIT u/s 263 of the Act 61. I.T.A. No.511/Ind/2024 3 Assessment Year: 2014-15 3.1 The contents of the affidavit are reproduced as under for ready reference: I.T.A. No.511/Ind/2024 4 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No.511/Ind/2024 5 Assessment Year: 2014-15 I.T.A. No.511/Ind/2024 6 Assessment Year

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

253 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act\" for\nsake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by\nthe order bearing\nNumber\nITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/\n1065838986(1) dated 19.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250\nof the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the \"Impugned\nPage 1 of 22\norder\". The relevant Assessment

SHRI DANDI SEWA ASHRAM,ONKARESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION , BHOPAL

In the result the \"Impugned order\" is set aside as and by\nway of remand back to the file of the Ld

253 of\nthe income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act\nfor the sake of convenience & brevity] before this tribunal as\nand by way of a second appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by\nthe order\nbearing\nNumber:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-\n25/1065627607(1) dated 13/06/2024 passed by the Ld. CIT\n(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein

BSM SHELTER ESTATE INDIA,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), INDORE , INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniita No. 291/Ind/2024(Ay: 2015-16) Bsm Shelter Estate India Ito 1(3), बनाम/ Private Limited, Indore Vs. 27/2/3, Gram Bhangarb, Near Mr-10, Indore (Pan: Aafcb3409E) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 9. We next find that the CIT(A) has decided first-appeal ex-parte qua assessee for the reason that the assessee did not make any submission before him despite opportunities given. It is further observed

BSM SHELTER ESTATE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(3), INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniita No. 291/Ind/2024(Ay: 2015-16) Bsm Shelter Estate India Ito 1(3), बनाम/ Private Limited, Indore Vs. 27/2/3, Gram Bhangarb, Near Mr-10, Indore (Pan: Aafcb3409E) (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent)

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 9. We next find that the CIT(A) has decided first-appeal ex-parte qua assessee for the reason that the assessee did not make any submission before him despite opportunities given. It is further observed

SHEETAL NATH COLONIZERS,BHOPAL vs. ITO,1(2), BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, BHOPAL

In the result the impugned order is set aside as & by way of

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisheetal Nath Colonizers, Ito 1(2) बनाम/ Plot No.48, M/S Sheetal Nath Bhopal Vs. Colonizers, Near Arya Bhawan, M. P. Nagar Zone Ii Bhopal (Pan: Abzfs4967L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N. D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal as & by way of a second Appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1082096271 (1) dated 29.10.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein after referred