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

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

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

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee are:- (a) in ITA No. 48/Pat/2020: 1. For that the appellate order passed u/s. 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. For that the ld. CIT(appeals) has not been justified in confirming the order passed

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee are:- (a) in ITA No. 48/Pat/2020: 1. For that the appellate order passed u/s. 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. For that the ld. CIT(appeals) has not been justified in confirming the order passed

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

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(6) of the Income Tax Act, thus lacking natural justice.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "271(1

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 of Rs 1

LAL BAHADUR PANDEY,SARAN vs. ITO, WARD,-2(2), CHHAPARA

In the result, the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borads.A. No. 9/Pat/2024 (In Ita No. 507/Pat/2024) Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Lal Bahadur Pandey,…………………………..Applicant Vill. Bheldi, Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar-841402 [Pan:Bifpp6882H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………….Respondent Ward-2(2), Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar & I.T.A. No. 507/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Lal Bahadur Pandey,…………………………..Appellant Vill. Bheldi, Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar-841402 [Pan:Bifpp6882H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………….Respondent Ward-2(2), Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Narendra Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after

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

1. In this case, there is a delay of 3 days for which the assessee has filed a petition for condonation in which it has been mentioned that aged mother of assessee being ill, the appeal was slightly delayed in filing of the appeal. Considering the shortness of delay and the reasons mentioned in the said petition, the delay

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

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

1. That the issue in this appeal relates to disallowance of exemption u/s 12A on\nthe ground that there was delay in filing of form-10B.\n2. That CBDT has issued a circular bearing no-16/2024 dated-18/11/2024,\naccording to which the delay in filing of audit report in form-10B can be condoned.\n3. That the appellant

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

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

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

1. That I have filed an appeal before Hon'ble I.T.A.T, Patna through Form No. 36 of\nthe Income Tax Act 1961.\n2. That the time of filing alleged appeal a delay of 30 days crept in due to the reason\nmore-fully described in condonation of delay petition filed before I.T.A.T.\n3. That at the time of handing over

PRABHAT KUMAR,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

Appeal is allowed\nfor statistical purposes

delay is\nhereby condoned and the matter is admitted for adjudication.\n2\nThis appeal emanates from the order dated 17.11.2023 passed by\nthe Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal\nCentre (NFAC), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)"] u/s 250\nof the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter ‘the Act').\n2.1 In this case

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(6) of the Income Tax Act. Sub-section 6 of section 250 contemplates

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

OM PRAKASH SHA,NALANDA vs. ITO, WARD, 2(4), BIHARSHARIF, BIHARSHARIF

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

250/-. The AO in the assessment proceeding has also noted that\nthere has been a total deposit of ₹76,25,650/- in the bank account of\nthe assessee and assessee did not file return of income. Therefore, the\nsource of cash deposit remains unexplained. Notice u/s 142(1) of the\nAct was issued to the assessee but there

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

section 250(6) of the Act and the appeal was dismissed merely on account of non-prosecution. By considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we remit the matter to the file of Ld. AO who shall examine the requisite Form No. 10B duly filled in by the assessee as per law after the delay