RAM KUMAR,SUPAUL vs. ITO, 3(5), SAHARSA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

delay in filing of the appeal may kindly be condoned. 9. For that the appellant reserves his right to file detailed submission at the time of hearing. 10. For that the appellant craves leave to urge, add or alter any other ground or grounds at the time of hearing.” 3. Rival contentions were heard and the record and the submissions

K.B. TECHNIC PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. DC/ACIT, CIRCLE-2, PATNA

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

condoned the delay as the reasons provided were genuine and bonafide, and the Department did not object. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A)'s order was passed without considering the assessee's reply and was in violation of Section 250

DIPAK KUMAR SINGH & SONS HUF,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2), PATNA

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

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee claimed that the delay was on account of ignorance of law and the assessee was alerted for filing the appeal only when they received a notice proposing levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue of delayed filing with the help of several authorities on the subject and has declined to condone the said delay due to which the appeal was dismissed. 3.1 Further aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present appeal arises from order dated 12.09.2024, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’) by the Ld. I.T.A. No. 324/Pat/2018 Amit Kumar Singh Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi. 3. In this case, the Ld. AO passed

RAJESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (2), GAYA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and hears the appeal on merits.” 5. Rival contentions were heard and the record and the submissions made have been examined. Both before the Ld. AO as well as before the I.T.A. No.: 171/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar. Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not be represented properly and the Ld. AR requested that

PARTH SARTHI BALY SHILPI EDUCATIONAL TRUST,VAISHALI, HAJIPUR vs. CPC, BENGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condonation of delay.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "11", "12A", "250", "119(2)(b)" ], "issues": "Whether the disallowance of exemption under Section

MINTU RANI,PATNA vs. ASSESSEMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, ('the Act'), dated 24-09-2024. 2. For that the NFAC erred in confirming the assessment order passed by the Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, (the AO'), assessing the appellant under section 147 read with section 144 of the Act, vide order dated 20-03-2024 at an income

PAPPU KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (4), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 7. With the assistance of ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. The ld. CIT(Appeals) has dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, which is contrary to the mandate given in section 250

ARJUN KUMAR SAH,VAISHALI vs. ITO WARD- 1(3), VAISHALI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the ‘Act’) by ld. Commissioner of Income- tax (Appeal)-NFAC, Delhi [in short ld. ‘CIT(A)’] dated 29.05.2023 arising out of the assessment order framed u/s 144 of the Act dated 28.11.2019. 1.1. The brief facts of the case of the appellant are that the assessee through his son Mr. Anant

ATLANTIS MEDICARE PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It observed that the facts of the case needed to be established clearly and fairly at the CIT(A) level. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "250

GRAM NIRMAN MANDAL,NAWADA vs. DC/AC EXEMPTION, CIR, PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay of form no 10B. 5) That as per record delay of 1260 days and due to this reason, petition was rejected by authority. 6) That, in this year assessee has filed form no 10B electronically on 13/04/2022. 7) That, due to unavailability of electronically filed 10B, during assessment process, Ld. A.0 has disallowed every claimed exemption

MADHURI DEVI,SAHARSA vs. ITO WARD- 3 (4), SAHARSA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that, The Learned Assessing Officer, being ITO, Ward-3(4), Saharsa (Here in after called the "AO") has erred in Assessing the appellant on a total Income of Rs 7001665/- as against

SAROJ DEVI,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the Assessment Order dated 16.12.2019 as passed u/s 143(3) read

MS. NAYDU KUMARI,MADHEPURA vs. DC/AC CIRCLE-3, PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condoned the delay as the reasons provided were genuine and bonafide. The lower authorities' orders were ex-parte as the assessee failed to furnish documents. The Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the AO for passing a fresh order.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "69A", "143(2)", "142(1)", "250

RAJ KISHORE UPADHYAY,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, SIWAN, SIWAN

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

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act’). In this case, the Ld. AO passed an order of penalty u/s 271AAC(1) of the Act on the basis of an addition of Rs. 2,23,88,245/- made in quantum matter u/s 69A of the Act. It is a matter of record that the Ld. AO has passed

PAWAN KUMAR, PROP. LIFE LINE RICE MILLS ,BEGUSARAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), , BEGUSARAI

In the result, these two appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes

condonation of delay the filing of the present\nappeal.\n2. That the appellant states that in order was passed by the Commissioner of\nIncome Tax (Appeals), NFAC under section 250

VIJAY KUMAR SINGH,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 6 (2), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condoned the 283-day delay in filing the appeal, finding it to be for a reasonable cause and not a deliberate attempt to delay. The appeal was then considered on its merits, with the Tribunal noting that the NFAC order dismissed the appeal without looking into the merits.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "Sec. 250

VASUNDHARA VIHAR CONSTRUCTION PRIVATE LIMITED,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), KATIHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

250 days and later by 190 days.", "held": "The Tribunal condoned the delay on finding the reasons to be bonafide and genuine. The appeal was restored to the file of the Learned CIT(A) with a direction to decide on merit after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing.", "result": "Allowed", "sections

NARESH YADAV,PURNIA vs. ITO, PURNIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condoned the delay as it was for bonafide and genuine reasons. The Tribunal noted that the appeal was decided ex-parte before the CIT(A) without deciding issues on merit, which violates Section 250