ALOK KUMAR,RANCHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

250, out of the same, on daily basis, nearly in 72 to 75% of the cases, adjournments are being sought. As the Bench was constituted and the same was also intimated much in advance and the adjournment has been sought in the last minute, therefore, the adjournment applications are being rejected. 5. It may also be worthwhile to mention here

ALOK KUMAR,KANKE ROAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

250, out of the same, on daily basis, nearly in 72 to 75% of the cases, adjournments are being sought. As the Bench was constituted and the same was also intimated much in advance and the adjournment has been sought in the last minute, therefore, the adjournment applications are being rejected. 5. It may also be worthwhile to mention here

ALOK KUMAR,KANKE ROAD vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE TWO

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

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

250, out of the same, on daily basis, nearly in 72 to 75% of the cases, adjournments are being sought. As the Bench was constituted and the same was also intimated much in advance and the adjournment has been sought in the last minute, therefore, the adjournment applications are being rejected. 5. It may also be worthwhile to mention here

ALHAMD EDUCATION & WELFARE TRUST,HAZARIBAGH vs. ITO - WARD 1(1), AAYKAR BHAWAN, HAZARIBAGH

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

condoning delay.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["Section 250", "Section 143(1)", "Income-tax Act, 1961"], "issues": "Whether the appeal was rightly

INDIAN EDUCATION TRUST,DHANBAD vs. COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX APPEAL, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay(Virtual Hearing) Indian Education Trust, Exemption Ward, Shishu Vihar, Bastacolla, Dhansar, Dhanbad. Vs. Dhanbad, Jharkhand. Pan No. Aaati 4414 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts by dismissing the appeal under Section 250 without adjudicating the issues on merit, despite condoning the delay

PAWAN KUMAR,RANCHI vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), RANCHI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.487/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Pawan Kumar….………...................................…...........................……….……Appellant A/3, Manorama Enclave, Argora, Pundag Road, Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834012. [Pan: Agypk0863F] Vs. Ito, Ward-2(2), Ranchi……........…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 23, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 03.10.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 15 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause & That The Delay Was Not Intentional. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. No One Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee In Spite Of Serving Notices For Hearing & The Tribunal Cannot Keep This Appeal Pending For Indefinite Time Due To Non-Representation. Therefore, In The Absence Of Any Authorised Representative Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Decide The

condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the appeal on merits of the case. 3. No one has appeared on behalf of the assessee in spite of serving notices for hearing and the Tribunal cannot keep this appeal pending for indefinite time due to non-representation. Therefore, in the absence of any authorised representative of the assessee

ANKITA AGARWAL,JAMSHEDPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(1), JAMSHEDPUR, JAMSHEDPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.499/Ran/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Ankita Agarwal………...................................…...........................……….……Appellant Near Kali Mandir, Harharguttu, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand-831002. [Pan: Atkpa9502A] Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Jamshedpur........…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : June 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 23, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 28.06.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. At The Outset, The Registry Has Informed That There Is A Delay Of 125 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. The Assessee Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Reasons For Such Delay. After Considering The Application, We Find Reasonable Cause & That The Delay Was Not Intentional. We, Therefore, Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal & Adjudicate The Appeal On Merits Of The Case. 3. No One Has Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee In Spite Of Serving Notices For Hearing & The Tribunal Cannot Keep This Appeal Pending For Indefinite Time Due To Non-Representation. Therefore, In The Absence Of Any Authorised Representative Of The Assessee, We Proceed To Decide The

250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. At the outset, the Registry has informed that there is a delay of 125 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee filed an application for condonation of delay stating reasons for such delay. After considering the application, we find reasonable cause and that the delay

RAJENDRA KUMAR SAHI,RANCHI vs. CIT (APPEAL), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi.T.A. No.148/Ran/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Rajendra Kumar Sahi………….……………............................……….……Appellant Hulhundu, Hatia, Ranchi, Jharkhand – 834003. [Pan: Agkps0098L] Vs. Cit(Appeal), Jharkhand….....…..….…..….........……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 29, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Nfac, Delhi [“Cit(A)”] Dated 07.08.2024 Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (The “Act”) For The Assessment Year 2022–23. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2022–23 Declaring A Total Income Of ₹4,96,520. The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny As The Assessee Had Disclosed Comparatively Low Income Against Receipts On Which Tcs Had Been Deducted. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Noted A Possibility That The Assessee Had Shown Low Income In Order To Reduce Taxable Profits. It Was Also Observed That The Assessee Had Claimed Significantly Higher Tds In The Revised Itr. Therefore, The Ao Intended To Verify The Genuineness Of The Additional Tds Claim & Whether The Corresponding Receipts Had Been Offered To Tax. Accordingly, Notices Under Sections 143(2) & 142(1) Of The Income-Tax Act Were Issued To The Assessee. However, The Assessee Did Not Comply With The Notices. Consequently, The Ao

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”) for the assessment year 2022–23. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed the return of income for the assessment year 2022–23 declaring a total income of ₹4,96,520. The case was selected for scrutiny as the assessee had disclosed comparatively low income against receipts

S S CHARITABLE TRUST,DUMKA vs. CIT APPEAL, RANCHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee-trust stands allowed

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.49/Ran/2022 Assessment Year: 2016-17 S S Charitable Trust..….…..…………..…...…......................……...…..….. Appellant S S Vidya Vihar School, New Kumar Para, Near Dudhani Rasikpur, Asharam Road, Jharkhand-814110. [Pan: Aafts1387R] Vs. Ito, Exemption Ward, Ranchi…………………….……….…………….. Respondent Appearances By: Shri Devesh Poddar, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Pranob Kumar Koley, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : March 02, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : April 28, 2023 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee-Trust Against The Order Dated 30.03.2022 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’).

250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. The assessee in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. The learned CIT(A) was not justified in holding that the appellant failed to file the requisite Form 10 before the AO and the AO is correct in making addition

DEBASREE SENGUPTA,SONARI vs. ITO WARD 1 (1), JAMSHEDPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahay

1 Debasree Sengupta National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 05.02.2025 passed for Assessment Year 2018-2019. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed her return of income declaring a total income of Rs.2,90,250 for the assessment year 2018-19. As per information available with the Assessing Officer, the assessee had shown purchases