CIT v. Velingkar Brothers

MAHARASHTRA RAJYA PATHYAPUSTAK MANDAL KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -2, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee stands ALLOWED

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 733/Pun/2023 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Maharashtra Rajya Pathyapustak Mandal Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Maryadit, Bal Bharati, Senapati Bapat Rd., Pune – 411 004 Pan: Aaaam2009A . . . . . . . अपऩलधर्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -2 Pune . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध / Appearances Assessee By : Mrs. J.R. Chandekar Revenue By : Shri Keyur Patel सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 25/09/2023 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 26/09/2023 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Of The Assessee For Assessment Year 2017-18 [For Short ‘Ay’] Is Assailed Against Revisionary Order Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, [For Short ‘Pcit’] Dt. 21/03/2022 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Assessment Order Dt. 24/12/2019 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(5), Pune [For Short ‘Ao’].

…nd delay caused in filing the present appeal. In view of Hon’ble Apex Court’s decision in ‘Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in ‘CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers’ reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), we deem fit to condone the delay in the larger interest of justice and dismiss the objection of the Revenue. 5. We find that the solitary issue raised in the present appeal is covered by the decision of the co-ordinate bench in ITA No.231/PUN/2022 for assessment year 2017-18, order dated 29/11/2022, wherein also it was the order passed u/…

MAHESH MANAV SEVA SANSTHA,ICHALKARANJI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX - EXEMPTION, PUNE

The appeal of the appellant is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 625/Pun/2022 Mahesh Manav Seva Sanstha Gala No 5-8, Igm Hospital, Ichalkaranji-416115 Pan:Aadam4300M . . . . . . . अपीलाथी / Appellant

…Page 3 of 6 Mahesh Manav Seva Sanstha ITA No.625/PUN/2022 PAN:AADAM4300M decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) & Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), we condone the delay in the larger interest of justice. 6. In the extant appeal, we vouched that, the Ld. CIT(E) after considering the preliminary submission had called for an additional evidential documents which the appellant meritoriously failed to make good by the due date, consequent to which, the Ld. CIT(E) without further opportuni…

SMT. TARADEVI RATANLAL BAFNA,JALGAON vs. THE OF ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, NASHIK

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 296/Pun/2020 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt Taradevi R Bafna 91, Subhash Chow, Jalgaon. Pan : Aadpb9424E . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनधम / V/S. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Nasik . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Sunil Ganoo Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपनवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/10/2022 घोषणध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 01/12/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Is Challenged Against The First Appellate Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals-12), Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 30/07/2018 For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2015-16 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act,1961 [For Short “The Act”] Which Emanated Out Of Order Of Penalty [For Short “Po”] Dt. 28/06/2017 Passed By The Acit, Central Circle-1(3), Nasik [For Short “Ao”] U/S 271Aab Of The Act.

…o.296/PUN/2020 AY: 2015-16 belated filing, consequently in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), the delay stands condoned in the larger interest of justice. 8. We shall now deal with ground number 1 and 2 first, which alleges the deficiency in the SCN dt 28/12/2016 issued u/s 274 r.w.s. 271 to the appellant pursuant to which the penalty u/s 271AAB of the Act is levied, it’s apt to quote the text of the such SCN which reads as; “You…

NEW SUNRISE ENGLISH HIGH SCHOOL,THANE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION, PUNE

The appeal of the appellant is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE in above terms

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 153/Pun/2020 New Sunrise English High School Desalepada Bhopsar, Dombivli (E), Thane – 421204. Pan:Aactn5566C . . . . . . . अपीलाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax Officer Exemption, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Pankaj Kumar सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 30/11/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 30/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Of The Assessee Is Assailed Against The Order Refusal To Grant Of 12A Registration, Passed U/S 12Aa(1)(B)(Ii) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”] By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [For Short “Cit(E)”] Dt. 12/07/2019 For The Reasons Of Non-Compliance With The Requirement Sought.

…ing sufficiency of reason in delayed filing, consequently in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) & Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), we condone the delay in the larger interest of justice. 7. In the extant appeal, we vouched that, the Ld. CIT(E) after considering the preliminary submission had called for an additional evidential & complying documents inter-alia, copy of MOA, detailed note on activities of the Trust, NOC of Trust premises, declaration u/s 13(1)(c), 2(15…

DILIP BHATTU KARANJULE,,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 11(1),, PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 838/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2012-2013 Dilip Bhattu Karanjule 482/B, Audumber, Suraj Nagar, Shirur (Ghodnadi), Pune – 412210 Pan:Acdpk5361M . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Deepak Sasar Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 27/09/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Pune-1 [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 24/10/2016 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Arose Out Of Assessment Order Dt. 23/03/2015 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Income Tax Officer, Ward 11(1), Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2012-13. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

…ing sufficiency of reason in delayed filing, consequently in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) & Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), we condone the delay in the larger interest of justice. 8. Inasmuch as the admission of additional evidence is concerned, it shall suffice to state that, rule 29 of ITAT-Pune Page 6 of 12 Dilip B Karanjule ITA No.838/PUN/2018 AY: 2012-13 ITAT Rules is embedded negatively by restricting rights of either party to produce additional oral or…

M/S. HARMONY CONSTUCTION,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -1(3), NASHIK

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 234/Pun/2020 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Harmony Construction ‘Rim’ Bungalow, Nr Taran Talav, Gaikhe Colony, Nashik Rd, Nashik – 422101 Pan: Aaffh4263F . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3), Nashik . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Sanket Joshi Revenue By : Shri Ramnath Murkunde सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 14/10/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nashik [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 13/11/2019 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Arose From Assessment Order Dt. 22/12/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Nashik [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2014-15. 2. The Appellant Assessee Raised Following Grounds;

…sufficiency of reasons in belated filing, consequently in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), the delay stands condoned in the larger interest of justice. 8. Coming to short issue of adjudication on applicability of provisions of section 43CA, on the perusal of the records it palpably transpired that, the appellant during the course of its business in relation to 11 identified units has entered into registered ATS fixing the value…

PARRY PHYTOREMEDIES PRIVATE LIMITED, (E.I.D. PARRY INDIA LIMITED),,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.20/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Parry Phytoremedies Private Limited (Now Known As E.I.D. Parry (India) Limited) S.No.73/2, Shivane Industrial Estate, Warje, Nda Rd, Nr Agarwal Godown, Pune – 411023 Pan: Aaccp9589J . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 4, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. A. Gundecha Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/11/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 01/02/2018 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Ascended Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 24/02/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 4, Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2013-14. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 17

…sufficiency of reasons in belated filing, consequently in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), the delay stands condoned in the larger interest of justice. 9. In coming to sole and substantive ground, it evidently transpired that; 9.1 The appellant undisputedly is engaged in the business of extraction of lycopene from the imported tomato paste as its raw material, and such extraction is either sold in domestic market as such or exp…

GARVE MOTORS PVT.LTD,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 9,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.776/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Garve Motors Pvt. Ltd., S.No.136/1A 46, B P Road, Pune – 411016 . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan:Aadcg4391A बनाम / V/S. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Circle – 9, Pune द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mrs. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 26/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 07/10/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Extant Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-6, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 06/12/2017 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Climbed Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 15/03/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-9, Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2013-14. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 12

…e sufficiency of reason in belated filing, consequently in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), the delay stands condoned in the larger interest of justice. 9. We shall now deal with ground number 1 9.1 Without reproducing the provision of applicable section in verbatim, it shall purposive to state that, by the residuary head of deduction u/s 36, the assessee while computing its taxable income under chapter IV- ITAT-Pune Page 6 of 1…

PRASHANT PRATAP AHIR,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 10,, PUNE

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1954/Pun/2018 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Prashant Pratap Ahir At – Bunglow No.8, Mahindra Society, 121, Nagar Road, Pune – 411006 . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan:Aefpa6461E बनाम / V/S. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Circle – 10, Pune द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Prashant Pratap Ahir Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing :12/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12/10/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 07/08/2018 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Soared Out Of Assessment Order Dt. 21/12/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 147 By The Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-10, Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2013-14. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 9

…of reason in belated filing of the appeal, consequently in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), the delay stands condoned in the larger interest of justice. 8. Coming to the sole, substantive and meritare ground of appeal, it remained an undisputed fact that, the appellant fell into non-filer category as per the database of Revenue, consequently in the evince of substantial financial transactions undertaken including cash deposits i…

SHIRUR SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL,SHIRUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.453/Pun/2022 Shirur Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Ghodnadi, Shirur Dist. Pune . . . . . . . अपीऱार्थी / Appellant Pan:Abefs4407J बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Exemption, . . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Pune. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Kishor Phadke Revenue By : Shri Sardar Singh Meena सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 04/10/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 04/10/2022 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Appeal Challenges The Order Of Rejection Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption)-Pune [For Short “Cit(E)”] Dt. 09/09/2020 Passed U/S 12Aa(1)(B)(Ii) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”]

…d and hence deserves condonation, therefore we ad idem, in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), condoned the delay in instituting the present appeal. 7. In so far as the merits of the case is concerned, it is uncloudly transpires from the records that, the appellant trust could not be represented before the Ld. CIT(E) in securing the registration u/s 12A of the Act for the genuine and sufficient reasons, hence keeping in mind the ac…

VIGHNAHARTA DEVELOPERS AND PROMOTORS,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, , BENGALURU

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.663/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019 Vighnaharta Developers & Promoters Near Zp School, Gahunje, Post Dehu Road, Pune – 412101 . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan:Aalfv8040J बनाम / V/S. Asst. Director Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Cpc, Bengaluru . द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 26/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 03/10/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Assailed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short “Nfac” / “Faa”] Dt. 30/06/2021 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Climbed Out Of Assessment Order Dt. 09/08/2019 Passed U/S 143(1) By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bengaluru [For Short “Cpc” / “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2018-19. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 5

…of the Ld. AR and for the reasons, condoning the delay in the light of decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), we restore the file back to the jurisdictional AO for verification of claim and to deal therewith in accordance with law as applicable for the impugned AY after according sufficient opportunity to the appellant for adducing sufficient evidence in support of its claim, thus we order accordingly. 7. Resultantly, the appeal of the appellant…

VINITA DEEPAK AHUJA,KOLHAPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No. 723/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-2019 Vinita Deepak Ahuja 1657-58, Lohiya Compound, Gandhi Nagar, Kolhapur. . . . . . . . अपीऱधर्थी / Appellant Pan : Alnps6479B बनाम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Cpc, Bengaluru. द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 08/09/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 08/09/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 10/12/2021 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Arisen From An Order Of Intimation Dt. 29/04/2019 U/S 143(1) From The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Cpc, Bengaluru [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2018-19. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 6

…Court in “Collector Land Acquisition Vs MST Katiji and Others” reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC) and Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in “CIT Vs ISRO Satellite Centre” reported at 263 ITR 549 (Kar) and Hon’ble Bombay High Court in “CIT Vs Velingkar Brothers” reported at 289 ITR 382 (Bom), find that, there was sufficient cause for condoning the delay in institution of appeal before first appellate ITAT-Pune Page 4 of 6 Vinita Deepak Ahuja ITA No. 723/PUN/2021 AY: 2018-19 authority, and hence Ld. CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay keeping in view of the laws laid down by the Hon’ble Courts cited hereinbefore and further…

TDK ELECTRONICS AG, (FORMERLY KNOWN AS EPCOS AG),,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (IT), CIRCLE -1,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviिनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Tdk Electronics Ag Vs. Acit (It), (Formerly Known As Epcos Ag) Circle-1, Pune C/O. Epcos India Pvt. Ltd., E-22-25, Midc Satpur, Nashik 422 007 Pan : Aaace9787H Appellant Respondent

…on (2A), there was a cleavage of opinion as to whether a High Court can condone the delay beyond the period prescribed in sub-section (2) of section 260A. The full Bench of 8 TDK Electronics AG Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Velingkar Brothers (2007) 289 ITR 382 (Bom.) (FB) observed that sub-section (2) of section 260A does not make section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 inapplicable and accordingly held that the power to condone delay in filing appeal must be read to be existent. Thereafter, the Hon’ble Supreme Court had an occasion to consider this issue in the context of Excise Act in Commission…