SUBHASH CHAND NAWAL (HUF),AJMER vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, AJMER

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

2) of the Act. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land & Acquisition vs. Mst Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) held as under: ‘’The Legislature has conferred power to condone delay by enacting section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, in order to enable the courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing

AO (SC), AVVNL, SIKAR,SIKAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC (TDS), GHAJIABAD

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

234E Under clause c of subsection 1 of 200A. 1. The assesse has filed an appeal with Ld CIT(appeals) Ajmer which was technically delayed . The delay in filing the appeal was due to the fact that the appellant/applicant did not receive any intimation from department, On knowledge from portal the assesee comes to know and he filed an appeal

AJMER VIDHUT NITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

AJMER VIDHUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, BHUPALSAGAR, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

AJMER VIDYUT NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, BHUPALSAGAR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

AJMER VIDHUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

AJMER VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, BHUPALSAGAR,BHUPALSAGAR, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

AJMER VIDHUT VITRAN NIGAM LIMITED, RAWATBHATA,RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH vs. ITO (TDS), CHITTORGARH, RAWATBHATA, CHITTORGARH

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: Moving Towards The Facts Of The Case We Would Like To Mention

section 234E of the Act. The said intimation was served upon the assessee only on 19.03.2024 on official e-mail of Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigma Limited and therefore, the appeal was filed late if that date of order is considered and thereby the same was filed delayed before Ld. CIT(A). The delay from the date of the order under

XEN (O&M) AVVNL, DANTA RAMGARH,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, KHATUSHYAMJI,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, KANWAT ,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, DANTA RAMGARH,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, KANWAT ,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, NEEM KA THANA,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, DANTA RAMGARH,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well

AEN (O&M) AVVNL, DANTA RAMGARH,SIKAR vs. DCIT, CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for

2. There is delay of 14, 17, & 20 days respectively in filing these three set of fours appeals. The assessee has filed applications for condonation of delay and has explained the cause of delay of 14 to 20 days. AEN (O&M) AVVNL vs. DCIT, CPC(TDS) 3. We have heard the ld. AR as well