Asstt. CIT v. Taggas Industries Development Ltd.

80 ITD 21Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2002#12967 most cited
8

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2022.

Judgments citing Asstt. CIT v. Taggas Industries Development Ltd.

Kokila Balaraman, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 13(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 718/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. N. Sanjay Gandhi, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…er to condone the delay and such delay can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. The Calcutta Tribunal, in the case of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Taggas Industries Development Limited, 80 ITD 21, has not condoned the delay for filing the appeal late by 13 days because the delay was not due to sufficient casue. 7. In this case, the delay is for 649 days. The only reason given is Auditor’s professional commitment, which led to not filing the appeal within 30 days. This explanation of the Assessee perhaps would be accepted for a short delay…

B.Gokula Krishnan, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 13(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 717/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. N. Sanjay Gandhi, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…er to condone the delay and such delay can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. The Calcutta Tribunal, in the case of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Taggas Industries Development Limited, 80 ITD 21, has not condoned the delay for filing the appeal late by 13 days because the delay was not due to sufficient casue. 7. In this case, the delay is for 649 days. The only reason given is Auditor’s professional commitment, which led to not filing the appeal within 30 days. This explanation of the Assessee perhaps would be accepted for a short delay…

Rakesh Kumar Jaiswal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-47(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 4295/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Shafiq Khan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 5

…g to the specified period of limitation must be applied with their rigour and effective consequences. In this case delay for filing the appeal late for only a few days was not condoned. In the case of Asstt. CIT v. Taggas Industries Development Ltd. [2002] 80 ITD 21(Cal.), Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, did not condone the delay for filing the appeal late by 13 days because the delay was not due to sufficient cause. Thus, relying on the above judgments, I hold that assessee failed to explain that delay in filing the appeal was due to sufficient cause. In view of the above, I do not find any reason to c…

Ashok D Thakkar, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward2(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 86/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Meena

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinivas T. Bidni, CIT-DR

…ting to the specified period of limitation must be applied with their rigour and effective consequences. In this case delay for filing the appeal late for only a few days was not condoned. In the case of Asstt. CIT v. Taggas Industries Development Ltd. [2002] 80 ITD 21 (Cal.), Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, did not condone the delay for filing the appeal late by 13 days because the delay was not due to sufficient cause. Thus, relying on the above judgments, we hold that assessee failed to explain that delay in filing the appeal was due to sufficient cause. 4.2. In view of the above, we are of the view that…

Kinzo Exports P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, appeals of Assessee are dismissed

ITA 6554/DEL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri B.L. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 142A(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “SMC” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.6554 & 6553/Del./2018 Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 M/s. Kinzo Exports Pvt. The DCIT, Ltd., B-57, Vishwakarma Colony PUI, Paraladpur, Central Circle, vs. Mehrauli Badarpur Road, Noida. New Delhi.PAN AADCK2063K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri B.L. Gupta, Income Tax Practitioner. For Revenue : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 29.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 02.05.2019 ORDER Both the appeals by the same assessee are directed against the common Order of the Ld. C…

Kinzo Exports P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, appeals of Assessee are dismissed

ITA 6553/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri B.L. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 142A(1)Section 153C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “SMC” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.Nos.6554 & 6553/Del./2018 Assessment Years 2010-2011 & 2011-2012 M/s. Kinzo Exports Pvt. The DCIT, Ltd., B-57, Vishwakarma Colony PUI, Paraladpur, Central Circle, vs. Mehrauli Badarpur Road, Noida. New Delhi.PAN AADCK2063K (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri B.L. Gupta, Income Tax Practitioner. For Revenue : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 29.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 02.05.2019 ORDER Both the appeals by the same assessee are directed against the common Order of the Ld. C…

Rizwan, Gurgaon vs. ITO, Ward-3(5), Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 7807/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Mago, C.AFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “SMC” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.No.7807/Del./2018 Assessment Year 2014-2015 Shri Rizwan, Punhana, The Income Tax Officer, Mewat, Haryana-122508 Ward-3(5), 6th Floor, PAN ANXPR9424P C/o. Shri Rakesh Kataria, HSIIDC Building, Vanijya vs. Advocate, 304, 2nd Floor, Nikunj, Udyog Vihar, Deep Plaza, Opposite District Court, Gurgaon. Phase-V, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 001. Haryana. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri Rajeev Mago, C.A. For Revenue : Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing : 29.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 01.05…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. D.K. Jain, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1485/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Saini & Sh. L. P. Sahuacit D. K. Jain Circle – 32(1) D-19, Nazamuddin East, New Delhi Vs. New Delhi

For Appellant: Sh. Gautam JainFor Respondent: Sh. Anil Kr. Sharma, Sr. DR

…ating to the specified period of limitation must be applied with their rigour and effective consequences. In this case delay for filing the appeal late for only a few days was not condoned. In the case of Asstt. CIT v. Taggas Industries Development Ltd. [2002]80 ITD 21(Cal.), Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, did not condone the delay for filing the appeal late by 13 days because the delay was not due to sufficient cause. Thus, relying on the above judgments, we hold that revenue failed to explain that delay in filing the appeal was due to sufficient cause. 8 9. Considering the above discussion in the light of…

Asstt. CIT v. Taggas Industries Development Ltd. (80 ITD 21) — Cited in 8 Judgments | BharatTax