KHURSHID ASHRAF,PATNA vs. ITO WARD-4 (5), PATNA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

condone the delay and decide the appeal on merit. 3. The assessee has taken eleven grounds of appeal, which are descriptive in nature. Before adverting to the specific grounds of appeal, we deem it appropriate to take note of facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed his return

AARIF ALI,SIWAN vs. AC/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. Nos.278 To 283/Pat/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2018-19 Aarif Ali……………………………….………. …………………....Appellant Son Of Khush Mohammad, Resident Of Village: Sallahpur, P.O Dindayalpur, Ps: G.B Nagar Darwara, Dist: Siwan, Bihar, Pin-841506. [Pan: Bxfpa9056H] Vs. Acit/Dcit, Muzaffarpur....…..……………..………………….…..... Respondent Appearances By: None (Adjournment Petition Filed) Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Md. Shadab Ahmed, Cir(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 16, 2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench: All These Six Appeals In Ita Nos. 278 To 283/Patna/2025 Have Been Filed By The Same Assessee For Assessment Years 2013–14 To 2018– 19, Respectively. Since The Issues Involved In All These Appeals Are Common Except For Variations In Figures & Assessment Years, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience. 2. At The Outset, It Is Noted That There Is A Delay Of 95 Days In Filing All The Captioned Appeals. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition Explaining The Reasons For The Delay. After Considering The Submissions And