Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. v. Ms Katiji and Others

167 ITR 5Supreme Court of India1987#593 most cited

What is Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. v. Ms Katiji and Others authority for?

The principle of 'sufficient cause' for condonation of delay in filing appeals requires a liberal interpretation to ensure substantial justice, but delay will not be condoned if sufficient cause is not satisfactorily explained by the appellant.

164

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Land Acquisition Anantnag v Katiji · Collector Land Acquisition v Mst Katiji · 167 ITR 5 SC · condonation of delay · sufficient cause for delay · appeal filing delay · Section 253(1) Income Tax Act · Section 249(2) Income Tax Act · liberal interpretation of delay · income tax appeals · judicial discretion delay · justice over technicality

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 250Section 253(1)Section 153CSection 143(3)Section 1963Section 246ASection 144

Issues it is cited on

section 253(1)section 200a(1)(c)section 200a(1)section 12ab(4)section 200(3)section 12ab(1)(b)(ii)section 249(2)section 253(3)section 12ab(1)section 12ab(1)(b)section 12a(1)(ac)(vi)section 273

Judgments citing Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. v. Ms Katiji and Others

Jai Hind Souharda Pattin Sahakari Niyamit, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(3), Belagavi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 168/PAN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji16 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Jai Hind Souharda Sahakari Sangh Niyamit, Bazar Road, Tal.: Hukkeri, Belgavi-591309 Pan:Aaajj0226F . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal[‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 251(2)Section 253(1)Section 80P

…ng establishes ‘sufficient cause’ and thus finds merits for condonation in view of the parameters laid in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC). In view thereof in the larger interest of judice we deem it fit to condone delay in instituting the present appeal u/s 253(1) of the Act and proceed to adjudicate limited issue of ex-parte dismissal of first appeal by the Ld. CIT(A). Recording the same, advanced accordingly. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that; the assessee is a Coo…

Shri Jyoti Multipurpose Souhard Sahakari Sangh Nyt Examba, Examba, Chikodi, Belagavi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Nippani, Belagavi

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 172/PAN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji27 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2022-23 Shri Jyoti Multipurpose Souharda Sangh Niyamit Examba, Chikodi, Belgavi-591244 Pan:Aabas2730D . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Shivanand Halbhavi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)Section 253(1)

…ng establishes ‘sufficient cause’ and thus finds merits for condonation in view of the parameters laid in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC). In view thereof in the larger interest of judice we deem it fit to condone ordinary delay caused in instituting the present appeal u/s 253(1) of the Act and proceed to adjudicate the limited issue of ex-parte dismissal of first appeal by the Ld. NFAC. Recording the same, advanced accordingly. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that; the…

Tridev Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2, Raipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 427/RPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Subash Agarwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 10A(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 251Section 270ASection 271ASection 274Section 40A(3)

…beyond undeliberate delay of 40 & 41 days in instituting these twin appeals, we after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), in the larger interest of judice deem it fit to condone the same and proceed to adjudicate the limited issue of ex-parte dismissal of first appeal by the Ld. CIT(A), recording the same, we advanced accordingly. ITAT-Raipur Page 2 of 8 Tridev Ispat Private Limited vs. DCIT ITA No. 426 & 427/RPR/2025 5. Briefly stated common facts of twin cas…

Tridev Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Central Circle (2), Raipur

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 426/RPR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur16 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Subash Agarwal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Dr. Priyanka Patel [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 10A(3)Section 132Section 153ASection 246ASection 250Section 251Section 270ASection 271ASection 274Section 40A(3)

…beyond undeliberate delay of 40 & 41 days in instituting these twin appeals, we after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), in the larger interest of judice deem it fit to condone the same and proceed to adjudicate the limited issue of ex-parte dismissal of first appeal by the Ld. CIT(A), recording the same, we advanced accordingly. ITAT-Raipur Page 2 of 8 Tridev Ispat Private Limited vs. DCIT ITA No. 426 & 427/RPR/2025 5. Briefly stated common facts of twin cas…

The Karnataka Multipurpose Souharda Sahakari Niyamit, Chikodi vs. E Assessment, Nipnai

ITA 122/PAN/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Sept 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 122/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Karnataka Multipurpose Souharda Sahakari Niyamit. Bhagyalaxmi Nagar, Chikodi, Belgavi-591201. Pan : Aaaat4824A . . . . . . . Appellant V/S National Faceless E-Asstt Centre, Delhi . . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Chetan Chougule [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 03/09/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Apl/S/250/2023-24/1057730634(1) Dt. 06/11/2023 Passed By Addl./Jt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals-1, Coimbatore, [‘Ld. Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Rectification Order Dt. 28/05/2021 Passed U/S 154 Of The Act By The Central Processing Centre, Bengaluru [‘Ld. Cpc’] Anent To Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Chetan Chougule [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(3)

…filing present in time allowed and the case of the assessee falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], thus requiring us to condone the delay in the larger interest of justice. In view thereof the undeliberate delay occurred in instituting present appeal by the appellant assessee, after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice we condone the same and advanced for adjudication. ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 7…

Gurunath Gundu Gojagekar, Belagavi vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Belgavi

ITA 143/PAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 143/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Gurunath Gundu Gojagekar 508, Hindu Nagar, Tilakwadi, Belgavi-590006. Pan : Aappg4152N . . . . . . . Applicant V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Belgaum. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Omkar Godbole [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 12/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 13/08/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1073157632(1) Dt. 12/02/2025 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Rectification Dt. 02/03/2021 Passed U/S 154 Of The Act By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Belagavi [‘Ld. Ao’] Anent To Assessment Year 2013-14 [‘Ay’].

For Appellant: Mr Omkar Godbole [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 154Section 246ASection 250

…f reasons beyond undeliberate delay of 15 days in instituting present appeal, we after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), in the larger interest of judice deem it fit to condone the same and proceed to adjudicate the limited issue of ex-parte dismissal of first appeal by the Ld. NFAC. Recording the same, advanced accordingly. 3. Without touching the merits and grounds of the appeal, Ld. AR submitted that, the impugned order has suffered from (a) violation of pr…

Srithik Ispat Private Limited, Goa vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 2(1) Panaji, Goa, Panaji

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 48/PAN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year: 2016-17 Srithik Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Plot No. 3, Sanguem Industrial Estate, Sanguem, Goa-403704 Pan : Aaics1765P . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing: 30/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Assessee’S Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Challenges Din & Order No 1068425181(1) Dt. 06/09/2024 Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’] U/S 250 Of The Act Which Originated From Order Of Assessment Passed U/S 144 Of The Act By Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Panaji, Goa. [‘Ld. Ao’].

For Appellant: Mrs Girija Agrawal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)Section 253(1)Section 40Section 68

…sons behind 98 days delay in filing present appeal and find them fit for condonation, hence condoned in view of ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)]. 4. As we note that, the assessee is limited company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act and was engaged in the business of processing of sponge iron. For the year under consideration, the assessee company filed its return on 29/11/2016 returning/declaring a loss of ₹7,28,68,020/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scr…

Devi Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

Accordingly. The grounds thus stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 32/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused materi…

Devi Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

Accordingly. The grounds thus stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 31/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused materi…

Devi Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

Accordingly. The grounds thus stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 30/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused materi…

Devi Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

Accordingly. The grounds thus stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 29/PAN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused materi…

Devi Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

Accordingly. The grounds thus stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 28/PAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused materi…

Devi Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

Accordingly. The grounds thus stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 27/PAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by the Ld. CIT(A) and subject to rule 18 of ITAT-Rules 1963 perused materi…

Richa Rosy D'Souza, Margao vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Margao

Appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 113/PAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(1)

…from filing appeals within statutory period. As these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we therefore after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the said delay and advanced to adjudicate limited issue of violation of principle of natural justice. ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 6 D’Souza Group Vs ITO ITA No. 110 to 113/PAN/2024 AY : 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. Without touching merits of…

Richa Rosy D'Souza, Margao vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Margao

Appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 112/PAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(1)

…from filing appeals within statutory period. As these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we therefore after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the said delay and advanced to adjudicate limited issue of violation of principle of natural justice. ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 6 D’Souza Group Vs ITO ITA No. 110 to 113/PAN/2024 AY : 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. Without touching merits of…

Mrs. Richa Rosy D'Souza (L. R. of Late Shri Geffrey Stephen D'Souza), Margao vs. ITO, International Taxation Ward, Panaji

Appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 111/PAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(1)

…from filing appeals within statutory period. As these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we therefore after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the said delay and advanced to adjudicate limited issue of violation of principle of natural justice. ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 6 D’Souza Group Vs ITO ITA No. 110 to 113/PAN/2024 AY : 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. Without touching merits of…

Mrs Richa Rosy D'Souza (L.R. of Late Shri Geffrey Stephen D'Souza), Margao vs. ITO, International Taxation Ward, Panaji

Appeals stands partly allowed for statistical purposes in aforestated terms

ITA 110/PAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji03 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253(1)

…from filing appeals within statutory period. As these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we therefore after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the said delay and advanced to adjudicate limited issue of violation of principle of natural justice. ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 6 D’Souza Group Vs ITO ITA No. 110 to 113/PAN/2024 AY : 2013-14 & 2014-15 6. Without touching merits of…

Ashirwad Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 41/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 10 Ashirwad Wines Vs DCIT ITA No 037 to 041/PAN…

Ashirwad Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 40/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 10 Ashirwad Wines Vs DCIT ITA No 037 to 041/PAN…

Ashirwad Wines, Belagavi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 39/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji01 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…peals within the statutory time limit and since these cases falls within the parameter set by Hon’ble Courts in ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [1987, 167 ITR 5 (SC)], we placing reliance thereon, in the larger interest of justice have condoned the delay and advanced for adjudication. 5. Without touching grounds & merits of additions, we have heard rival party’s common submissions on the ground concerning denial of personal hearing by ITAT-Panaji Page 3 of 10 Ashirwad Wines Vs DCIT ITA No 037 to 041/PAN…