Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 147, Section 144, Section 144B, Section 142(1), Section 250(6).

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

Q: How many judgments cite Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.?

451 judgments on BharatTax cite Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (2 SCC 107), spanning 2013 to 2026.

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 367,585 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 250 Section 147 Section 144 Section 144B Section 142(1)Section 250(6)Section 143(3)Section 148

Issues it is cited on

extension of limitation reasonable cause delay in filing appeal best judgment assessment section 12a(1)(ac)(iii)section 250(6)section 12a(1)(ac)condonation of delay section 12a(1)section 80g(5)service of notice section 12ab

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

Dipakraj Krishnamuni Marathe, Jalgaon vs. ITO Ward 1(4), Jalgaon

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 708/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Sarang GudhateFor Respondent: Shri R.Y. Balawade

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 69A

…lay is not intentional and assessee would not have gained from filing the appeals with a delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court 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) condone the delay of 468 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. Assessee has raised following grounds/additional ground of appeal : “1. Under the facts and circumstances of the case and…

Techmill Technologies Private Limited, Mysore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1) & Tps, Mysore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2016-17 M/S. Techmill Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Acit, 2Nd No.34, Floor, Ramanjaneya Circle – 1(1) & Tps, Complex, Hunsur Main Road, Mysuru. Manasagangothri, Mysuru – 570 006, Karnataka. Pan : Aadct 0474 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Siddesh N Gaddi, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Siddesh N Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 40a

…ed in the above petition, we noted that assessee had sufficient cause for not filing appeal within time. Therefore, relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji Page 3 of 6 and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1987 (2) SC, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The learned Counsel further submitted that notice issued by the learned CIT(A) was not seen as it might have settled in spam folder. Therefore, appeal could not be presented at the time of appellate proceedings. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that assessee filed return of…

Shri Jitendra Behl, Sriganganagar vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1080/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mrs. Raksha Birla, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT a

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBkSM+ deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 1080/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2017-18 Shri Jitendra Behl cuke The ITO, Vs. House No. J-07, Ridhi Sidhi Ward-3(2), IIND, Sri Ganganagar. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AGKPB4084F vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mrs. Raksha Birla, C.A. (through V…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-7(2)(3), Bengaluru vs. Mohammed Farooq Kanana, Bengaluru

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Soundararajan Kassessment Year : 2020-21 Ito, Vs. Mr. Mohammed Farooq Kanana, 6 9Th Cross, H Siddaiah Road, Ward – 7(2)(3), Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 027, Karnataka. Pan : Abvpm 1212 A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Thirumala Naidu, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Thirumala Naidu, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 147Section 250

…asons explained in the above petition, we noted that Revenue had sufficient cause for not filing appeal within time. Therefore, relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1987 (2) SC, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that assessee filed return of income on 01.02.2021 declaring total income of Rs.48,58,140//-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS for the following reasons: i. Large agricultural income ii. Agricultural income 5. Accordingly n…

Yetchina Srinivas, Bilaspur vs. DCIT, Circle, 1(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1904/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Sachin KumarFor Respondent: Shri Ajitesh Meena

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 8Section 80CSection 8O

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1904/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 Yetchina Srinivas, Vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Security Agency, Pune Bhartiya Nagar, Korba, Bilaspur 459006 Chattisgarh PAN : AAAPY0283B Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Sachin Kumar (through virtual) Respondent by : Shri Ajitesh Meena Date of hearing : 16.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee pertaining to Assessment Year 2018-19 is directed against the order dated 30.01.2…

Tangmarg Investment and Trading Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle-7, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1878/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1878/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 249(2)

…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 No.1878/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Tangmarg Investment and Vs. ACIT, Circle-7, Trading Pvt. Ltd., Pune B and C Wing, First Floor, Shangrila Garden, Pune H.O., Haveli, Pune 411001, Maharashtra PAN : AAACT7585L Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Kishor B Phadke Respondent by : Shri Bharat Andhale : Date of hearing 08.10.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at…

Balkrishna Dnyanoba Khandve, Pune vs. Central Circle 2(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2495/PUN/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2495/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 37Section 40A(3)Section 40a

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “A”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2495/PUN/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16 Balkrishna Dnyanoba Khandve, Vs. ACIT, Sr.No.22, Lohgaon, Central Circle-2(3), Vadgaon Road, Taluka Haveli, Pune Pune 411047 Maharashtra PAN : ABEPK0494P Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Kishor B Phadke Respondent by : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date of hearing : 22.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 29.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance…

Vaidehi Shashank Karade, Pune vs. ITO Ward-5 Panvel, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2100/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250

…ld.CIT(A) is not intentional and assessee would not have gained by delaying the filing. We therefore taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex 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) condone the delay of 268 days in filing of appeal before ld.CIT(A). However, since ld.CIT(A) has not dealt with the issues raised in Form No.35, we hereby remit back all the issues raised in the instant appeal to the file of ld.CIT(A) for afresh adj…

Vaibhav Dilip Metha, Ahilyanagar vs. ITO, Ward-2, Ahilyanagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2075/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S. BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Ajitesh Meena

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

…and assessee would not have gained from filing the appeal with a 2 Vaibhav Dilip Metha delay. I therefore in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court 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) condone the delay of 306 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and engaged in the business of Mobile Shopee and deriving in…

Sudam Pandurang Beldare, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-5(3), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2028/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250

…gained from filing the appeal with a delay. We therefore taking justice oriented approach and taking guidance from the judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court 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) condone the delay of 238 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. After hearing the ld. Departmental Representative and perusing the material on record, we observe that the assessee filed t…

Prem Bhakti Sadhana Kendra, Nashik vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1923/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iii)

…ee would not have gained by delaying the filing of appeal. We therefore taking justice oriented approach and following 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). condone the delay in filing the appeals before this Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.1922/PUN/2025 : 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a trust, filed application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii)…

Prem Bhakti Sadhana Kendra, Nashik vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1922/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iii)

Dnyaneshwar Nivrutti Kale, Ahmednagar vs. ITO, Ward(1), Ahmednagar

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

ITA 174/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

…lties faced by the litigants. Therefore, Ld.CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. 3 Dnyaneshwar Nivrutti Kale 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) as ‘reasonable cause’ prevented the assessee in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A). 5. The appellate remedy or forum is created by the statute is to rest the dispute and not to accelerate for higher forum perfunctorily. We would like to refer the j…

B S Somasekhar, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1545/BANG/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2013-14 Mr. Bommanayakanahalli Siddaiah Somashekhar, Vs. Ito, #51/4 21St Main, 22Nd Cross, Behind Maruthi Ward – 5(1)(1), Mandira, Vijaynagar, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 040, Karnataka. Pan : Ainps 4894 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Adarsh, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Muthu Shankar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 06.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri. Adarsh, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Muthu Shankar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 148Section 2(47)

…nable cause for delay and reasons have been explained. On going through the explanation submitted by the learned Counsel and by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1987 (2) SC, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Page 2 of 5 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that as per information received, assessee had transferred land at Rs.13,41,00,000/- to M/s. SNN Properties (LLP) during the impugned Assessment Year but no return of income was filed. Therefore, after following due procedures, assesse…

Gulshan Kumar, Gurgaon vs. ITO Ward-1(3), Gurgaon

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2242/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 194HSection 250Section 40Section 44ASection 69A

…as a dilatory tactic, the Court should normally condone the delay as the intent is always to promote substantial justice following the Hon’ble Supreme Court decisions in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs Mst. Katiji and others (1987) 2 SCC 107 and N. Balakrishnan Vs M. Krishnamurthy 1998 (7) SCC 123. 6. The explanation of the appellant assessee therefore, becomes relevant to determine whether the same reflects sufficient and reasonable cause on his part in not presenting this appeal within the prescribed time. In case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs MST Katiji (Supra), the Hon'ble Supr…

Kapse Foundation Yeola, Yeola vs. ITO Ward 1(1), Nashik

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

ITA 1430/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 250(6)

…e facts and circumstances of the case, 3 Kapse Foundation Yeola ld.CIT(A)/NFAC ought to have condoned the delay in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex 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). We therefore condone the delay of 574 days in filing the appeal before ld.CIT(A). 6. Considering the totality of facts and without offering any comments on merits of the case, we deem it fit to set-aside the impugned order and remit all the issues…

Brahm Precision Materials Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 425/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1183/Pun/2023 And

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

…ot intentional and assessee would not have gained from filing this appeal with a delay. We therefore taking guidance from the judgments of Hon'ble Apex 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) condone the delay of 445 days in filing of the instant appeal before this Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. Since most of the grounds raised in these two appeals are common, we proceed to dispose of these appeals by way of consolid…

Brahm Precision Materials Pvt Ltd, Aurangabad vs. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 1183/PUN/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1183/Pun/2023 And

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

Shamsundar Heramba Naik, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1564/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri.Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri.Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2017-18 Mr.Shamsundar Heramba Naik, Vs. Dcit - 3(3)(1), No.1/1, F-3, Petals, Chinnappa Garden Link Hmt Building, Road Benson Town, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 046,Karnataka. Pan : Afqps 8488 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri. Subramanian S,Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bangalore. Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.10.2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S,JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore

Section 143(1)Section 24

…reason for delay in filing the appeal. On going through the affidavit, we noted that there is reasonable cause for delay and by relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji and Others, (1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1987 (2) SC, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Page 2 of 4 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that assessee is an individual and derives income from salary. Assessee filed return of income on 29.07.2017 declaring total income of Rs.46,84,430/-. The return was processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 25.03.2019 making certai…

Bhushan Balasaheb Bagul, Dhule vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Ward -1, Dhule

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

ITA 1253/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Harish Bist

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC”, PUNE BEFORE DR.MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VINAY BHAMORE, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.1253/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2012-13 Bhushan Balasaheb Bagul, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 20, Satyam Colony, Ward-1, Dhule Pramod Nagar, Dhule Dhule 424002, Maharashtra PAN : AUPPB6339N Appellant Respondent Appellant by : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Respondent by : Shri Harish Bist Date of hearing : 17.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 10.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeal at the instance of assessee…