SHRI NAMIYUN PARSWANATH JAIN, SWETAMBER MANIDHARI TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes”

section 11 can not be denied, being merely procedural defect which is rectifiable. Also relied on M.P. High Court (1998)230 ITR 0714- filling of audit report being directory and can be filed up to assessment stage. 3) That the commissioner appeals faceless erred in confirming order of CIT(exemption) u/s 119(2) dated 11.09.2020 denying condonation of delay

SHRI KAMLA JANHITYA SAMITI,SATNA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 03/03/2021, refusing to condone the delay

LATE SMT SAMPAT BAI JAIN SMRITI SAMITI RUPESH JAIN ABHINAV X RAY, M G ROAD SATNA,SATNA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -EXEMPTION WARD, JABALPUR(M.P), JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’ hereinafter) dated 15/03/2022, refusing to condone the delay

SHRI NAMIYUN PARASHVANATH JAIN SWETAMBER MANIDHARI TRUST,JABALPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (EXAMPTION)), BHOPAL

In the result, assessee‟s appeal is dismissed as not maintainable

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

section 119(2)(b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („the Act‟, hereinafter) for assessment year (AY) 2018-19. 2. At the very outset, it was observed by the Bench that the assessee has, and only rightly so, moved an application (through it‟s counsel, Shri Bardia), seeking permission for withdrawal of the instant appeal as the same