Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.

2 SCC 107Supreme Court of India1987#157 most cited

What is Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. authority for?

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

451

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,735 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Collector v. Katiji · Mst. Katiji · condonation of delay · delay in filing appeal · liberal approach · justice on merits · extension of limitation · reasonable cause · Section 250 · Section 147 · Section 148

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 147Section 144Section 144BSection 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

extension of limitationreasonable causedelay in filing appealbest judgment assessmentsection 12a(1)(ac)(iii)section 250(6)section 12a(1)(ac)condonation of delaysection 12a(1)section 80g(5)service of noticesection 12ab

Judgments citing Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.

Kota Vipassana Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 557/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपील सं./ITA No. 257 & 557/JP/2025 U/S 12AB & 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year : 2025-26 Kota Vipassana Trust बनाम The CIT (Exemption) Vs. Jaipur 1, Dhammathali, Via Sisodiya Rani Ka Bagh Galta Ji Road, Jaipur – 302 002 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAETK 8352 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Shailesh Mantri, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

…fore this Tribunal. The delay is attributable solely to the aforementioned genuine misconception and not due to any negligence or mala fide intent. 5. That it is settled law as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs Katiji (1987 – 2 SCC 107) that a liberal approach should be adopted in condoning te delays where sufficient cause is shown, particularly when the delay is not deliberate and the party has acted in good faith.The assessee submits that the reason for the delay in this case is genuine and constitute sufficient case. 6. That no prejudice will be caused to theRespondent if the…

Kota Vipassana Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 257/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपील सं./ITA No. 257 & 557/JP/2025 U/S 12AB & 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year : 2025-26 Kota Vipassana Trust बनाम The CIT (Exemption) Vs. Jaipur 1, Dhammathali, Via Sisodiya Rani Ka Bagh Galta Ji Road, Jaipur – 302 002 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAETK 8352 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Shailesh Mantri, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

…fore this Tribunal. The delay is attributable solely to the aforementioned genuine misconception and not due to any negligence or mala fide intent. 5. That it is settled law as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs Katiji (1987 – 2 SCC 107) that a liberal approach should be adopted in condoning te delays where sufficient cause is shown, particularly when the delay is not deliberate and the party has acted in good faith.The assessee submits that the reason for the delay in this case is genuine and constitute sufficient case. 6. That no prejudice will be caused to theRespondent if the…

Salarpuria Properties Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Central Circle - 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1986/KOL/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jul 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 51

…ars from the report of the registry that the appeal has been filed after a delay of 939 days for this the assessee has filed condonation petition. The Ld. A.R relied on the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 (SC) wherein it was held thus: "3. The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting Section 51 of the Indian Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on 'merits'. The expression "sufficient cause" employed by the legislature is adequately elastic to enable…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 275/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…subserve the cause of justice, we hereby condone the delay occurred in filing all the appeals before ld.CIT(A) in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). Since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in appeal, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-asid…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Wrd-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 274/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…subserve the cause of justice, we hereby condone the delay occurred in filing all the appeals before ld.CIT(A) in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). Since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in appeal, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-asid…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…subserve the cause of justice, we hereby condone the delay occurred in filing all the appeals before ld.CIT(A) in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). Since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in appeal, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-asid…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 272/PUN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…subserve the cause of justice, we hereby condone the delay occurred in filing all the appeals before ld.CIT(A) in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). Since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in appeal, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-asid…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Wrd-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 271/PUN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…subserve the cause of justice, we hereby condone the delay occurred in filing all the appeals before ld.CIT(A) in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). Since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in appeal, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-asid…

Ashok Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 270/PUN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms.Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Prathik SandbhorFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 250Section 270Section 271(1)(c)

…subserve the cause of justice, we hereby condone the delay occurred in filing all the appeals before ld.CIT(A) in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). Since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in appeal, we deem it proper to restore all the issues raised in the instant appeals to the file of ld.CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. Needless to mention that ld.CIT(A) in the course of set-asid…

Sadulla Syed Noorsha Syed, Nanded vs. Income Tax Officer, Nanded

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

ITA 167/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

…refore condone the delay of 355 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication by placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). 4. Though the assessee has raised grounds of appeal but the grievance is only revolving around the additions made by ld. Assessing Officer towards taxable Gratuity at Rs.15,29,260/- and taxable Leave Encashment at Rs.17,27,648/-. 5. Facts in brie…

Navrang Majoor Sahakari Society Ltd., Jalgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(4), Jalgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 1460/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawadiaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

…ted time limit. I therefore condone the delay of 335 days and 182 days in filing the appeals by the assessee(s) in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and proceed to adjudicate the issues raised in the instant appeals. 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to both the appeals stated that the CPC has disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessees u/s.80P of the Act for A.Y. 2018-19 which is not in accordance with law because the powers have been given to the CPC by way of am…

Panchashil Majoor Sahakari Society Ltd., Jalgaon vs. ITO, Ward 1(4), Jalgaon

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee(s) are allowed

ITA 1459/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Vinay KawadiaFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80P

…ted time limit. I therefore condone the delay of 335 days and 182 days in filing the appeals by the assessee(s) in light of Judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and proceed to adjudicate the issues raised in the instant appeals. 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee referring to both the appeals stated that the CPC has disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessees u/s.80P of the Act for A.Y. 2018-19 which is not in accordance with law because the powers have been given to the CPC by way of am…

Rooman Technologies Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)& TDS, Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 536/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q 3]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.533 to 536/Bang/2025 Assessment Years : 2015-16 (Quarters 1 to 4) M/s. Rooman Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (TDS), 130, Dr. Rajkumar Road, 1st Block, Ward –3(1), Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 010. PAN : AABCR 2857 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Vinod Gard, CA Revenue by : Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 ORDER Per Bench : These appeals are filed by the…

Rooman Technologies Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 535/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q2]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.533 to 536/Bang/2025 Assessment Years : 2015-16 (Quarters 1 to 4) M/s. Rooman Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (TDS), 130, Dr. Rajkumar Road, 1st Block, Ward –3(1), Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 010. PAN : AABCR 2857 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Vinod Gard, CA Revenue by : Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 ORDER Per Bench : These appeals are filed by the…

Rooman Technologies Pvt Ltd., Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 534/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q1]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.533 to 536/Bang/2025 Assessment Years : 2015-16 (Quarters 1 to 4) M/s. Rooman Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (TDS), 130, Dr. Rajkumar Road, 1st Block, Ward –3(1), Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 010. PAN : AABCR 2857 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Vinod Gard, CA Revenue by : Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 ORDER Per Bench : These appeals are filed by the…

Rooman Technologies Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 533/BANG/2025[2015-16 Q4]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2025

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Shri. Vinod Gard, CAFor Respondent: Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 2Section 200ASection 234ESection 271(1)(a)Section 271H

…IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN K, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.533 to 536/Bang/2025 Assessment Years : 2015-16 (Quarters 1 to 4) M/s. Rooman Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs. ITO (TDS), 130, Dr. Rajkumar Road, 1st Block, Ward –3(1), Rajajinagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 010. PAN : AABCR 2857 A APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Vinod Gard, CA Revenue by : Shri. R. Rajamanohar, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 17.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 23.07.2025 ORDER Per Bench : These appeals are filed by the…

Shivaji Sopan Gote, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Pune

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

ITA 1264/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A VazeFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(3)Section 250

…the instant case, we condone the delay of 382 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). 4. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested for remitting the issues to the file of lower authorities as impugned order is exparte and assessee failed to furnish necessary details owing to his medical issues. Now the assessee is in a…

Madappa Family Trust, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 33(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 990/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Madappa Family Trust Ito, Ward 33(2), 36 Lala Lajpat Rai Sarani 10, Sir William Jones Sarani, Bhawanipur Middleton Row, Park Street Area, Vs. Kolkata-700020 Kolkata-700071 West Bengal West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaetm9550F Assessee By : Shri Miraj D Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Dung Dung, DR
Section 250(6)

…on the part of the accountant of the assessee, the appeal could not be filed within the time. In our opinion, the justice cannot be denied on the technical reasons as has been held by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Singh vs. Mst. Katiji And Ors. (1987) 2 SCC 107 (SC), that substantial justice must prevail on the technicalities. Therefore, considering the reason cited before the ld. CIT (A), we condone the delay. Since, the appeal has Madappa Family Trust; A.Y. 2023-24 been dismissed as ex-parte, without deciding the same on merit which is apparently in violation of provision of Section 250(6) of the Act, t…

Yogesh Hanumantrao Joshi, Pune vs. DCIT Circle - 12, Pune

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

ITA 956/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Kumar Kedia
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 6Section 90

…ase, I condone the delay in filing the 2 Yogesh Hanumantrao Joshi appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication in light of judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). 4. None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called for despite due service of notice of hearing. However, assessee has filed written submission along with paper book stating that based on written submissions and the paper book, is…

Sindhdurg District Ex-Servicemen Association, Sawantwadi vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

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

ITA 548/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastava
Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.544 to 548/PUN/2025 Assessment Years : 2016-17 to 2020-21 Sindhudurg District Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ex-servicemen Association, Exemption Ward, 3, Moti Tower, Salaiwada, Kolhapur Sawantwadi - 416510 Maharashtra PAN : AADTS7632K Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Respondent by : Shri Akhilesh Srivastava Date of hearing : 14.07.2025 Date of pronouncement : 16.07.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER BENCH : The captioned five appeals a…