Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT

419 ITR 732Supreme Court of India2019#5883 most cited

What is Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT authority for?

Courts should generally condone delay in filing appeals when there is a reasonable cause, and a liberal approach should be taken to ensure justice is not denied on technical grounds.

20

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2022 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT · condonation of delay · reasonable cause · liberal approach · admission of appeal · denial of justice · technical reasons · N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy · Collector · Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji

Sections most often in play

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 142(1)Section 68Section 10(26AAB)Section 12A

Issues it is cited on

best judgment assessmentsection 271(1)(c)condonation of delayunexplained cash creditreasonable causeassistant commissionersection 142(1)section 144section 68prescribedsection 147section 148

Judgments citing Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT

Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Rura, Kanpur Dehat vs. CPC, Bangalore ITO (Exemption), Kanpur

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

ITA 101/LKW/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow13 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Shweta Mittal, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, Addl CIT DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 249(2)(c)Section 250

…ealed against was served. However, in the present matter, the appeal was delayed by more than 4 years and 8 months. The ld. First Appellate Authority cited the decision in the case of Senior Bhonsle Estate (HUF) vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [2019] 419 ITR 732 (SC), to hold that for condonation of delay, the litigant had to show, ‘sufficient cause’. However, in the present case, he noted that the assessee had not made any submissions for the justifying the substantial delay in the filing of the present appeal as Column No. 14 of Form 35 had been left blank. He also pointed out that several notices were…

Alpha Charitable Trust, Thane vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune

In the result grounds of appeal raised by the Assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 455/MUM/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Ms.Padmavathy Salpha Charitable Trust, Commissioner Of Income H. No.453, Ghosar Wadi, Tax (Exemption), Room No.322, 3Rd Floor, Income Bhandar Aali, Bhuigaon-West, Vs. Bhuigaon Bk, Bhuigaon B.O, Tax Office, Pmt Building, Thane. Shankar Seth Road, Pan – Aaita4259M Pune-411037. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke (Virtually Appear)For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT-DR)
Section 12A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.PADMAVATHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Alpha Charitable Trust, Commissioner of Income H. No.453, Ghosar Wadi, Tax (Exemption), Room No.322, 3rd Floor, Income Bhandar Aali, Bhuigaon-West, Vs. Bhuigaon Bk, Bhuigaon B.O, Tax Office, PMT Building, Thane. Shankar Seth Road, PAN – AAITA4259M Pune-411037. (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Kishor Phadke (Virtually Appear) Revenue by : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (CIT-DR) Date of Hearing : 11.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31.12.2025 O R D E R…

St. Thomas Syro Malabar Catholic Church, Kolkata vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1567/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri SK Tulsian, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanat Kumar Raha, DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

…lay of 615 days should be given in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR. 471 (SC). 7. That the Hon'ble Apex Court in another case of Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT, (2019) 419 ITR 732 (SC), observed that the appellant asserted that he had no knowledge about the order passed on 29.12.2003 till he came to know of the auction of the property in June, 2008. It was thus held that indulgence should have been shown to the appeal by condoning the delay in filing the appeal. 8. That the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of DIT(E) vs…

Aryan Promoters Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC - 2(1), Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1789/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm Aryan Promoters Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Cc-2(1), Ruby House, 8, India Exchange Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700001, 110, Shantipally, Vs. West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aagca2975B Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan& Ms. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri Manas Mondal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 15.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan&For Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, DR
Section 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 68

…should not be denied justice on the technical reasons. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION v. Mst. KATIJI (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) vs. ACIT [2019] 419 ITR 732 (SC) dated 07-11-2019. Considering the facts of the case in the light of the aforesaid decisions, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 04. The assessee ,at the time of hearing, pressed ground no.4, which is against the confirmation of addition of ₹1,34,00,000/- (wrongly mentioned as 13.40 crores) by the ld.…

Satabdi Developers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 10(2), Kolkata

ITA 1787/KOL/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vp & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Shri Satabdi Developers Pvt. Ltd. Ito, Ward 10(2) Ruby House, 8, India Exchange Aaykar Bhawan Poorva, Place, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700001, 110, Shanti Pally, Vs. West Bengal Kolkata-700107, West Bengal (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No. Aakcs8130L Assessee By : Shri S.K. Tulsiyan& Ms. Lata Goyal, Ars Revenue By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2025

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan&For Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 68

…uld not be denied justice on the technical reasons. The case of the assessee find support from the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION v. Mst. KATIJI (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) and Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) vs. ACIT [2019] 419 ITR 732 (SC) dated 07-11-2019. Considering the facts of the case in the light of the aforesaid decisions, we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 04. Ground nos.1 to 3 are in support of ground no.4 while the issue raised in ground no.4 is against the order of ld. CIT (A) confirming the addition of ₹2,02,70,000/- as ma…

Psr Sustainability Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1921/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Respondent: Appellant by None
Section 12ASection 5Section 80G

…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.1920 and 1921/PUN/2025 PSR Sustainability Foundation, CIT(Exemption), Survey No.77/4p, Flat No.304, Vs. Pune Ganesh Shusti, Ravet, Pune 412101, Maharashtra PAN : AALCP9860F Appellant Respondent : Appellant by None Respondent by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 06.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeals at the instance of appellant are against the rejection of ap…

Psr Sustainability Foundation, Pune vs. CIT(E), Pune

In the result, both the appeals of the appellant are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1920/PUN/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Respondent: Appellant by None
Section 12ASection 5Section 80G

…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.1920 and 1921/PUN/2025 PSR Sustainability Foundation, CIT(Exemption), Survey No.77/4p, Flat No.304, Vs. Pune Ganesh Shusti, Ravet, Pune 412101, Maharashtra PAN : AALCP9860F Appellant Respondent : Appellant by None Respondent by : Shri Amit Bobde Date of hearing : 18.09.2025 Date of pronouncement : 06.10.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned appeals at the instance of appellant are against the rejection of ap…

Aar Gee Educational and Technical Society, Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1676/DEL/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalaar Gee Educational & Commissioner Of Income Technical Society, Tax (Exemptions), 50, Masi Garh, Second Floor, Vs. Delhi. Opp. Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi-110025 Pan:Aabta9238K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ca Pradeep Dang Department By Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Delhi (‘The Cit(E) In Short), Dated 25.04.2023 Rejecting The Application For Registration U/S 12A Of The Act.

Section 12A

…dmitted for adjudication and delay is bonafide. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgement of hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 and in the case of Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. Asstt. CIT [2019] 419 ITR 732 (SC). 3. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR objected to the condonation of delay in the filing of the appeal. 4. Heard both the parties. From the perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee and the reasons stated therein, we find that there is sufficient and reasonable cause with the assessee for filing the appeal with in prescribed time limit. I…

Shri Akhil Bhartiya Samarth Jain Shravak Sangh, Nashik vs. Exemption Ward 1(1), Nashik

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

ITA 649/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Kishor B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Amol Khairnar
Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)Section 80G(5)(iv)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “ए” न्यायपीठ पुणे में । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.649/PUN/2024 Shri Akhil Bhartiya Samarth CIT (Exemption), Jain Shravak Sangh, Pune 10 Vardhaman Residency, Vs. Soygaon Malegaon, Nashik – 423203 PAN : AAMTS7620L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kishor B. Phadke Department by : Shri Amol Khairnar Date of hearing : 02-12-2024 Date of 28-01-2025 Pronouncement : आदेश / ORDER PER ASTHA CHANDRA, JM : The appeal filed by the assessee is direc…

Prince Logistics Services Private Limited Kanchipuram, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 5(2). Chennai, Chennai

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2227/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2224 & 2225, 2226 & 2227/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 v. M/s.Prince Logistics – The ITO, Services Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward-5(2), No.57, HIG, NH1, Chennai. Maraimalai Nagar, Kanchipuram-603 209. [PAN: AAGCP 3783 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Resp…

Prince Logistics Services Private Limited, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 5(2). Chennai, Chennai

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2226/CHNY/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2224 & 2225, 2226 & 2227/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 v. M/s.Prince Logistics – The ITO, Services Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward-5(2), No.57, HIG, NH1, Chennai. Maraimalai Nagar, Kanchipuram-603 209. [PAN: AAGCP 3783 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Resp…

Prince Logistics Services Private Limited, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 5(2). Chennai, Chennai

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2225/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2224 & 2225, 2226 & 2227/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 v. M/s.Prince Logistics – The ITO, Services Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward-5(2), No.57, HIG, NH1, Chennai. Maraimalai Nagar, Kanchipuram-603 209. [PAN: AAGCP 3783 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Resp…

Prince Logistics Services Private Limited, Kanchipuram vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 5(2). Chennai, Chennai

In the result, four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2224/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Jagadish

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.2224 & 2225, 2226 & 2227/Chny/2024 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 v. M/s.Prince Logistics – The ITO, Services Pvt. Ltd., Corporate Ward-5(2), No.57, HIG, NH1, Chennai. Maraimalai Nagar, Kanchipuram-603 209. [PAN: AAGCP 3783 Q] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by Mr. Girish Kumar, Advocate : ""यथ" क" ओर से /Resp…

Om Prakash Sharma, Sanganer Jaipur vs. Ward 4(3), Jaipur

ITA 43/JPR/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Him. 2

For Appellant: Sh. Ashish SharmaFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…iciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so.” 7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has re-opened its decision in the case of Senior Bhonsle Estate, 419 ITR 732 /112 taxmann.com 134 Golden time service, 412 ITR 102" In support of the contentions so raised the assessee also submitted an affidavit. The Id. AR of the assessee also filed a declaration signed by the earlier counsel certifying the fact that he has upon receipt of the order on 17.07.2023 forwarded the mail to Sharawanshare76@gmail.com and amitk…

Sandeep Kaur Gill, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(4), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 268/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/934, Shukla Colony, Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…g of the present appeal merits to be condoned has relied on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) (ii) Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (2019) 419 ITR 732 (SC) 5. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘DR’) had objected to the seeking of the condonation of delay in filing of the present appeal by the assessee appellant. 6. On a careful perusal of the facts leading to the delay in filing of the present appeal, we are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the assessee’s…

Sandeep Kaur Gill, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer-3(4), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 267/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 267 & 268/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Sandeep Kaur Gill 26/934, Shukla Colony, Raja Talab, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adcpg7812K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(4), Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…g of the present appeal merits to be condoned has relied on the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) (ii) Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (2019) 419 ITR 732 (SC) 5. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘DR’) had objected to the seeking of the condonation of delay in filing of the present appeal by the assessee appellant. 6. On a careful perusal of the facts leading to the delay in filing of the present appeal, we are unable to persuade ourselves to subscribe to the assessee’s…

Ankit Kalash, Raipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 266/RPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur24 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 266/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2014-15)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal & Vimal AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…fter submissions of the aforesaid request by the assessee, Ld. AR, further submitted that the condonation of delay may be allowed in view of the judgment in the case of Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax is reported in (2019) 419 ITR 732(SC), wherein Hon’ble Apex Court has held that: “Revenue authorities having not expressly refuted the stand taken by the assessees that they had no knowledge about passing of the order dt 29th Dec. 2003 by the Tribunal until June, 2008, the High Court should have shown indulgence to the assessees by condoning the delay in filing the appeals are r…

Nephrology Association, Madurai vs. ITO, Exemption Ward, Madurai

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

ITA 793/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Sept 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.793/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Nephrology Association, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 6/6-B2, Sivagangai Road, Exemption Ward, Madurai North, Madurai. Tamil Nadu 625 020. [Pan:Aaban7750J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Suresh Guduri, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 07.09.2023

For Appellant: Shri G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Suresh Guduri, JCIT
Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 119Section 119(2)

…nd. In the light of the revenue not giving effect to the order of the CIT(Exemptions) dated 08.08.2022, the Petitioner / Appellant was advised to file an appeal immediately with a condonation on 03.07.2023 thereafter. The Supreme Court in the case reported in 419 ITR 732 had condoned 1754 days of delay in filing the appeal before the High Court in consequence to the listing of the assessee's property for auction in the recovery proceedings initiated by the Income Tax Department for the arrears of the total taxable payable by them after the adverse decision passed by the Appellate Tribunal. In this context, the Su…

Knp Secuties P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, CC-7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 97/MUM/2021[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Dr. P. Daniel
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 96 & 97/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2002-03) KNP Securities Pvt. Ltd., v. DCIT – Central Circle – 7(1) Bhupen Chambers, Ground Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 9, Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai - Mumbai - 400020 400023 PAN: AAACK4712C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal Department by : Shri Dr. P. Daniel Date of Hearing : 05.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.03.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. These appeals are…

Knp Securities P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT, CC-7(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 96/MUM/2021[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Mar 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Shri Amarjit Singh, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv KhandelwalFor Respondent: Shri Dr. P. Daniel
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (VIRTUAL COURT) “H” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA.NOs. 96 & 97/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2002-03) KNP Securities Pvt. Ltd., v. DCIT – Central Circle – 7(1) Bhupen Chambers, Ground Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 9, Dalal Street, Fort, Mumbai - Mumbai - 400020 400023 PAN: AAACK4712C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Rajiv Khandelwal Department by : Shri Dr. P. Daniel Date of Hearing : 05.01.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 10.03.2022 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. These appeals are…

Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT (419 ITR 732) — Cited in 20 Judgments | BharatTax