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

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

ITA 124/PAN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Satish M [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…mer appeals within the statutory time limit. 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 4 of 12 BS Bhate & Others Vs DCIT AY : 2013-14 to 2018-19 7. Without touching merits of additions, we have…

Nidhi Bar and Restaurant, Belgaum vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 122/PAN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Satish M [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…mer appeals within the statutory time limit. 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 4 of 12 BS Bhate & Others Vs DCIT AY : 2013-14 to 2018-19 7. Without touching merits of additions, we have…

Nidhi Bar and Restaurant, Belgaum vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 121/PAN/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Satish M [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…mer appeals within the statutory time limit. 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 4 of 12 BS Bhate & Others Vs DCIT AY : 2013-14 to 2018-19 7. Without touching merits of additions, we have…

Nidhi Bar and Restaurant, Belgaum vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 120/PAN/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Satish M [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…mer appeals within the statutory time limit. 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 4 of 12 BS Bhate & Others Vs DCIT AY : 2013-14 to 2018-19 7. Without touching merits of additions, we have…

Nidhi Bar and Restaurant, Belgaum vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 119/PAN/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Satish M [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…mer appeals within the statutory time limit. 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 4 of 12 BS Bhate & Others Vs DCIT AY : 2013-14 to 2018-19 7. Without touching merits of additions, we have…

Nidhi Bar and Restaurant, Belgaum vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

ITA 118/PAN/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji18 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Mr BS Balachandran [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Satish M [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250Section 253(1)

…mer appeals within the statutory time limit. 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 4 of 12 BS Bhate & Others Vs DCIT AY : 2013-14 to 2018-19 7. Without touching merits of additions, we have…

Sujata Souhardha Pattina Sahakari Niyamita, Ankola vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Karwar

ITA 67/PAN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji06 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 067/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sujatha Souhardha Pattina Sahakari Niyamita At.: Balale, Post.:Madangeri, Tal.:Ankola, Dist.: Uttara Kannada. Pan : Aafas2907J . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Karwar . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Varun Bhat [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 05/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06/05/2025 Order

For Appellant: Mr Varun Bhat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 253(3)

…impugned order 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 of 146 days 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 P…

Sunil Hanamant Naikwad, Belgaum vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Belagavi

The appeal is ALLOWED as above

ITA 220/PAN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji22 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Sunil Hanmantsa Naikwad 1156, Saraf Galli, Shahapur, Belgaum Pan:Abeph0397N . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Belgaum. . . . . . . . Respondent

For Appellant: Mr JD Kalpavruksha [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ravindra Hattalli [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250Section 4

…eal against the impugned order 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)]. In view thereof the undeliberate delay of 49 days occurred in instituting present appeal after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice we condone the delay and advanced for adjudication. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that; the 3. assessee is an individual, who did not file his return o…

Cheryl Savia Indira Lobo, Calangute vs. ACIT, C-1(1), Panaji

ITA 275/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 275/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Cheryl Savia Indira Lobo H.No. E-100, Pobha Vado, Calangute, Bardez, North Goa, Goa Pan : Acbpl9307J . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-2(1) Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Vinod Totekar [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Smt Nazeera Mohammad [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 11/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 12/03/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1064290058(1) Dt. 23/04/2024 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 27/12/2018 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Asstt. Commission Of Income Tax Circle-2(1), Panaji Goa [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2016-17 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr Vinod Totekar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Smt Nazeera Mohammad [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 251(1)(a)Section 54E

…eal against the impugned order 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)]. In view thereof the undeliberate delay of 135 days occurred in instituting present appeal after placing reliance on former judicial precedents, in the larger interest of justice we condone the delay and advanced for adjudication. 3. Tersely stated facts of the case are that; the assessee is an individual who for the year under consideration…

Kabbur Poorva Bhag Vividoddhesha Prathamik Grameen Krushi S Sangh Ni, Kabbur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Nipani

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 304/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji05 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 304/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 The Kabbur Purvbhag Prathamik Krushi Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit At Post: Kabbur, Tal.:Chikodi, Dist.:Belgaum. Pan : Aadat9192J . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Nippani. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : None Revenue By : Mr S Manikandan [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 04/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 05/03/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1069069880(1) Dt. 25/09/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’ Hereafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 10/03/2021 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt. Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereafter] For Assessment Year 2018-19 [‘Ay’ Hereafter].

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr S Manikandan [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251Section 80P(2)

…al certificate. The reason explained in our considered view is sufficient to pass the test of sufficiency as laid in ‘Vijay V 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)]. Therefore, the insignificant postal delay occurred in filing this appeal is condoned and advanced for adjudication on merits. ITAT-Panaji Page 2 of 6 The Kabbur Purvbhag Prathamik Krushi Pattin Sahakari Sangh Niyamit Vs ITO ITA No 304/PAN/2024 AY: 2018-19 The long and short of the case is that; the assessee is an 4. agricultural co-operat…

The Gokak Taluka Agricultural Produced Co-Op Marketing Society Ltd, Gokak vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1, Belgaum

ITA 274/PAN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 274/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2020-21 The Gokak Taluka Agricultural Produced Co-Op. Marketing Society Ltd. Apmc Yard, Gokak, Dist. Belgaum Pan : Aaajt1462H . . . . . . . Applicant V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Belgaum. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr S Gadadi [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr S Manikandan [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 04/03/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; The Captioned Appeal Of The Assessee Impugns Din & Order Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1065710654(1) Dt. 18/06/2024 Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Nfac’ Hereinafter] U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 22/09/2022 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The National Faceless E-Asstt Centre [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] Anent To Assessment Year 2020-21 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr S Gadadi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr S Manikandan [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

…reasons beyond undeliberate delay of 72 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 dispute. 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 principle of natural justice and (b) from the compliance of s/…

Acgl Bbd Employees Coop Credit Society Ltd, Bhuimpal Honda Sattari Goa vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(1), Panaj, Panaji, Goa

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 212/PAN/2024[201718]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 212/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Acgl Bbd Employees Co-Op. Credit Society, Ltd. Bhuimpal Honda, Sattari, Bhuimpal, North Goa. Pan : Aaaaa8278M . . . . . . . Applicant V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Narendra Reddy [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/02/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1066146872(1) Dt. 27/06/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 19/12/2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Panaji [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2017-18 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Narendra Reddy [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

…undeliberate reason as explained from the affidavit are in our considered view sufficient to pass the tests laid in ‘Vijay V 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)] hence is condoned in the larger interest of justice and advanced for adjudication on merits. 3. The long and short of the case is that; the assessee is an employee co-operative credit society registered under the provisions of State Co-op. Societies Act. For the year under consideration the assessee derived/earned an interest income of ₹21,1…

Shri Narayana Gurudeva Trust, Nashik vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (E), Pune

ITA 1521/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1520 & 1521/Pun/2024 Shri Narayan Gurudeva Trust Pakhal Road, Vadala, Nashik-422001 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Aafts0349M

For Appellant: Mr Sanket Joshi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 253Section 80G(5)

…s & submission etc., and found them falling within the parameters set for condonation by various judicial precedents including ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [398 ITR 250 (Bom)], ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [167 ITR 5 (SC)] The reasons since being accidental and undeliberate on the part of appellant, are very much capable of forming ‘sufficient cause or reasons’ for the purpose of s/s (5) of section 253 of the Act which in our considered view prevented the appellant trust from instituting these present twin appeals within the statutory time allowed under s/s (3)…

Shri Narayana Gurudeva Trust, Nashik vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune

ITA 1520/PUN/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Pune17 Oct 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1520 & 1521/Pun/2024 Shri Narayan Gurudeva Trust Pakhal Road, Vadala, Nashik-422001 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Aafts0349M

For Appellant: Mr Sanket Joshi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 253Section 80G(5)

…s & submission etc., and found them falling within the parameters set for condonation by various judicial precedents including ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [398 ITR 250 (Bom)], ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ [167 ITR 5 (SC)] The reasons since being accidental and undeliberate on the part of appellant, are very much capable of forming ‘sufficient cause or reasons’ for the purpose of s/s (5) of section 253 of the Act which in our considered view prevented the appellant trust from instituting these present twin appeals within the statutory time allowed under s/s (3)…

Rameshwar Baburao Bharad, Parbhani vs. ITO Ward-Hingoli, Hingoli

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 1592/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt. Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Shubham Rathi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

…e separate appeals against respective assessment orders before the Ld. NFAC, 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 ITAT-Pune Page 5 of 6 Rameshwar Baburao Bharad Vs ITO ITA No. 1590 to 1592/PUN/2024 judice we condone the same as; ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 11. In view hereof, without offering any comments on merits of th…

Rameshwar Baburao Bharad, Parbhani vs. ITO Ward-Hingoli, Hingoli

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 1591/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt. Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Shubham Rathi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

…e separate appeals against respective assessment orders before the Ld. NFAC, 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 ITAT-Pune Page 5 of 6 Rameshwar Baburao Bharad Vs ITO ITA No. 1590 to 1592/PUN/2024 judice we condone the same as; ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 11. In view hereof, without offering any comments on merits of th…

Rameshwar Baburao Bharad, Parbhani vs. ITO Ward-Hingoli, Hingoli

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 1590/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt. Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Shubham Rathi [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

…e separate appeals against respective assessment orders before the Ld. NFAC, 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 ITAT-Pune Page 5 of 6 Rameshwar Baburao Bharad Vs ITO ITA No. 1590 to 1592/PUN/2024 judice we condone the same as; ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 11. In view hereof, without offering any comments on merits of th…

Nisarg Developers, Pune vs. ITO Ward 14(5), Pune

ITA 1523/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S Nisarg Developers Sr No. 84/3B, Gund Wasti, Manjari Farm, Tal. Haveli, Pune-412307 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Aag Fn9326G

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Singte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43C

…curred in instituting the present appeal, in the larger interest of justice and 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), we deem it fit to condone the same and advanced accordingly. 3. We have heard the rival submission on the limited issue ex- parte dismissal of appeal by the first appellate authority; and subject to provisions of rule 18 of ‘ITAT Rules’ perused material placed on record. We note that, the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in constructio…

Jakraya Multi State Co-Operative Credit Soceity Limited, Solapur vs. Assessing Officer, National E-Assessment Centre

The appeal of the assessee stands ALLOWED

ITA 1423/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 1423/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: None for the assesseeFor Respondent: Mr BS Rajpurohit [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…90 days occurred in instituting the present appeal, in the larger interest of justice and 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’ [167 ITR 5 (SC), we deem it fit to condone the same and advanced accordingly. 4. The long and short of the case is that; 4.1 The assessee is a credit co-operative society registered under the provisions of Multi-State Co-op. Societies Act and is engaged in providing credit facilitates to its members. For the year under consideration the assessee filed its ret…

Tapaswini Mangesh Mahske, Thane vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 2, Panvel

Appeals are PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISITCAL PURPOSES in aforestated terms

ITA 1302/PUN/2024[AY 2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune01 Oct 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: None for the Assessee [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Arvind Desai [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 148Section 151Section 250Section 253(1)Section 274

…ond undeliberate postal delay of 21-22 days in instituting these separate appeals, we 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 holding as ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 8. We note that; against the order of assessment & penalty order passed on 29/09/2021 & 16/03/2022 a separate appeal were filed befor…