BAIJU ROY,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-4(2), PATNA

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

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

delay be condoned and appeal be decided on merit. 6. Ld. D.R., on the other hand, relied upon the finding of the ld. CIT(Appeals) and submitted that the assessee should be diligent in prosecuting his remedies before the Income Tax authorities. 7. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-section

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

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section 3 of section

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section 3 of section

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section 3 of section

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section 3 of section

M/S GEETANJALI ESTATE PVT LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

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

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section 3 of section

MOHAMMAD SOHEL ALAM,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD 3 (1), PURNEA

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

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

253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression sufficient cause employed in the section has also been used identically in sub- section 3 of section

EASTERN FOOD INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 2 (1), PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

6 month.\n3. The appellant may at the outset state that its Managing Director Shri. JP Singh on account of his octogenarian age handed over charge to Mr. Ravi Shashi who was mercilessly murdered on 23.03.2014. Unfortunately, enough the other director also died on 29.12.2014. In yet another unfortunate incident the son of the Chairman of the company also died

AMAR NATH SINGH,ARA vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: The Itat. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Given Explanation Which Is As Under:

6. It is further submitted that no prejudice or loss shall be caused to the Revenue by condoning such a minimal delay, whereas denial of condonation would result in irreparable loss and hardship to me as an assessee. 7. In view of the above bona fide and sufficient cause, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

253(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the said case.” It is seen that the request for condoning the said delays are similarly worded for the remaining two appeals. Hence, based on the reasons given for AY 2013-14, the delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

253(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the said case.” It is seen that the request for condoning the said delays are similarly worded for the remaining two appeals. Hence, based on the reasons given for AY 2013-14, the delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

253(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in the said case.” It is seen that the request for condoning the said delays are similarly worded for the remaining two appeals. Hence, based on the reasons given for AY 2013-14, the delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication

JITENDRA KUMAR RAY,LALGANJ, HAJIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(3) VAISHALI, HAJIPUR

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

Bench: or at the time of hearing of the Appeal. At the outset of hearing, we noted that the appeal filed by the assessee is delay by 256 days. In this regard, the assessee filed an affidavit dated 14.01.2026 stating the reasons for not filing appeal within the due date which is as under: “We enclose herewith an appeal u/s 253 of the I.T. Act 1961 against the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to

253 of the I.T. Act 1961 against the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to assessment year 2015-16 on the 27-05-2024. Through this appeal should have been filed on or before 27/07/2024. That I, due to awareness of technilities of Income tax provisions I could not open the e-mail

SHREE RANI SATI TEXTILES,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT/DCIT, CIR-2, MUZAFFARPUR

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been filed along-with memorandum of appeal. 07. That delay in filing the appeal is because of electronic service of order for which no intimation/alert message was received by the deponent that could have enabled him and also his poor health owing to fatal decease i.e. cancer in prostate gland

SHIVENDU SHEKHAR SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD6(5), PATNA

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

253(3) of the Income tax Act, 1961. When the assessee came to know about the order passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals) without considering the merit of the case, the assessee approached the ld. A.R. to prefer appeals, due to that there was a delay of 256 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, he pleaded

DUDHESHWAR GUPTA,ARRAH vs. ASISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1, PATNA, LOKNAYAK BHAWAN , PATNA

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

Bench: 03/02/2024, But Could Not Be So File As I Was Bed Ridden Due To High Fever & I Was Advised For Complete Bed Rest. We Therefore Pray That Delay In Filing The Appeal Should Be Condoned & It Should Be Treated As Filed Within The Allowed Time. & For This Act Of Kindness, I Shall Ever Pray.”

253 of the I.T. Act 1961agaisnt the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to assessment year 2017- 18 on the 05-12-2023. Through this appeal should have been filed on or before 03/02/2024, but could not be so file as I was Bed ridden due to high fever and I was advised for complete

MAYANK SINGH,PATNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-5, PATNA, PATNA

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

Bench: 01/04/2023, But Could Not Be So Filed As I Was Bed Ridden Due To Dengue & I Was Advised For Complete Bed Rest. We Therefore Pray That Delay In Filing The Appeal Should Be Condoned & It Should Be Treated As Filed Within The Allowed Time.”

253 of the I.T. Act 1961 against the order under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, relating to assessment year 2017- 18 on the 30.01.2023. Through this appeal should have been filed on or before 01/04/2023, but could not be so filed as I was Bed ridden due to dengue and I was advised for complete bed rest

SHIV SHANKAR SINGH CONTRACT PVT LTD,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, TDS, MUZAFFAPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

253(3) of Sixty days has expired. However, as decided by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Re: Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, in the order dated 23/09/2021, the period till 02/10/2021 shall stand excluded and a limitation period of 90 days would be available. 3) That in view of the above order of Hon'ble Supreme Court