What is Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT authority for?

An inordinately delayed order, especially one passed without proper notice, is vitiated and liable to be recalled and heard afresh. Such orders, passed with unwarranted delay or without due notice, constitute a violation of natural justice, rendering them invalid.

How many judgments cite Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT?

202 judgments on BharatTax cite Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT (317 ITR 433), spanning 2020 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 132, Section 153A, Section 253, Section 90(2), Section 6, Section 139(1).

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT (317 ITR 433)

M/S. M M BROTHERS,DHULE vs. ITO, WARD 1, DHULE, DHULE

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

ITA 477/PUN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), SHRI VINAY BHAMORE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. VazeFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale (Virtual)

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…cord and hence, the said issue may kindly be decided by Hon'ble ITAT without remanding the matter back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate this legal issue in view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in case of Coca Cola India (P) Ltd. [368 ITR 487]. 3. Without prejudice to the above grounds, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of Rs.5,41,176 levied by the A.O. without appreciating that in the quantum appeal, the CIT(A) had modified the basis for making the addition and hence, if at all, penalty was to be levied on the modified addition, then separate penalty pr…

SUSHMA SHRESTHA,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6248/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. Manas Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 250

…consonance with the established judicial precedence. It is submitted that, in G. Shoes Exports v. CIT, MA No. 25/Mum/2017, the Mumbai bench of this Ld. Tribunal, reinforced the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's in Shivsagar Veg. Restaurant v. ACIT, 317 ITR 433 and held that an inordinately delayed order is liable to be recalled and heard afresh. In the present case, the Ld. CIT (A) passed the Impugned Order after an unwarranted delay of nearly 4 (four) months. Therefore, in light of the established judicial precedent, the Impugned Order is vitiated and ought to be set aside. G. That the Ld. CIT (A) ha…

SUSHMA SHRESTHA,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6247/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. Manas Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 250

…consonance with the established judicial precedence. It is submitted that, in G. Shoes Exports v. CIT, MA No. 25/Mum/2017, the Mumbai bench of this Ld. Tribunal, reinforced the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's in Shivsagar Veg. Restaurant v. ACIT, 317 ITR 433 and held that an inordinately delayed order is liable to be recalled and heard afresh. In the present case, the Ld. CIT (A) passed the Impugned Order after an unwarranted delay of nearly 4 (four) months. Therefore, in light of the established judicial precedent, the Impugned Order is vitiated and ought to be set aside. G. That the Ld. CIT (A) ha…

SUSHMA SHRESTHA,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6246/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. Manas Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 250

…consonance with the established judicial precedence. It is submitted that, in G. Shoes Exports v. CIT, MA No. 25/Mum/2017, the Mumbai bench of this Ld. Tribunal, reinforced the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's in Shivsagar Veg. Restaurant v. ACIT, 317 ITR 433 and held that an inordinately delayed order is liable to be recalled and heard afresh. In the present case, the Ld. CIT (A) passed the Impugned Order after an unwarranted delay of nearly 4 (four) months. Therefore, in light of the established judicial precedent, the Impugned Order is vitiated and ought to be set aside. G. That the Ld. CIT (A) ha…

SUSHMA SHRESTHA,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6245/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. Manas Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 250

…consonance with the established judicial precedence. It is submitted that, in G. Shoes Exports v. CIT, MA No. 25/Mum/2017, the Mumbai bench of this Ld. Tribunal, reinforced the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's in Shivsagar Veg. Restaurant v. ACIT, 317 ITR 433 and held that an inordinately delayed order is liable to be recalled and heard afresh. In the present case, the Ld. CIT (A) passed the Impugned Order after an unwarranted delay of nearly 4 (four) months. Therefore, in light of the established judicial precedent, the Impugned Order is vitiated and ought to be set aside. G. That the Ld. CIT (A) ha…

SUSHMA SHRESTHA,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-13, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 6244/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble Vice- & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Dr. Manas Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Jitender Singh, CIT DR

Section 250

…consonance with the established judicial precedence. It is submitted that, in G. Shoes Exports v. CIT, MA No. 25/Mum/2017, the Mumbai bench of this Ld. Tribunal, reinforced the judgement of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court's in Shivsagar Veg. Restaurant v. ACIT, 317 ITR 433 and held that an inordinately delayed order is liable to be recalled and heard afresh. In the present case, the Ld. CIT (A) passed the Impugned Order after an unwarranted delay of nearly 4 (four) months. Therefore, in light of the established judicial precedent, the Impugned Order is vitiated and ought to be set aside. G. That the Ld. CIT (A) ha…

U B FOODS PVT. LTD,JALGAON vs. ITO, WARD1(2), , JALGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 986/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.986/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2015-16 U B Foods Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, D 33 Midc, Audyogik Vashat, S. Ward-1(2), Jalgaon. Jalgaon S.O, Jalgaon – 425003. Pan: Aabcu1322K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi Revenue By Shri Amit Bobde-Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 01/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 03.05.2024 Emanating From The Separate Assessment Orders Under Section 147 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, 1961 Dated 25.05.2023 For The A.Y.2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 69A

…is prayed that the said issue may kindly be decided by Hon'ble ITAT without remanding the matter back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate this legal issue in view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in case of Coca Cola India (P) Ltd. [368 ITR 487]. 4] Without prejudice to the above grounds, the assessee submits that the appellate order passed by CIT(A) in limine without deciding the issue on merits is not justified in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble ITAT, Pune in Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO in ITA Nos. 10 to 12/PUNE/2024 dated 20.02.2024 and hence, the said appeal may be r…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, DHULE vs. SANTOSH JAYNARAYAN SHARMA, DHULE

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed whereas the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2324/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2324/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay DhivareFor Respondent: Shri Chinmayy Suhas

Section 133(6)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69

…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.2324/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Income Tax Officer, Vs. Santosh Jaynarayan Sharma, Dhule Sharma Niwas, Home No.37, Behind Hanuman Temple, NH 3, Sangavi, Shirpur, Dhule – 425 405, Dhule, Maharashtra PAN : AOBPS4706E Appellant Respondent Cross Objection No.51/PUN/2025 (Arising out of ITA No.2324/PUN/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Santosh Jaynarayan Sharma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sharma Niwas, Home No.37, Dhule Behind Hanuman Temple, NH 3,…

MANISH JASHWANTRAI BHUTA,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

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

ITA 1502/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17 Manish Jashwantrai Bhuta Ito, Ward 1(1), Nashik Flat No.8, Pooja Apartment, Vs. Shivam Nagar, Hirawadi, Panchavati, Nashik – 422003 Pan: Aghpb1619F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanket M Joshi (Through Virtual) Department By : Shri Manish M. Mehta Date Of Hearing : 03-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20-11-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M Joshi (through virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manish M. Mehta

Section 132Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 153CSection 68

…that the said issue may kindly be adjudicated by Hon'ble ITAT itself without remanding the matter back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate this legal issue in view of the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in case of Coca Cola India (P) Ltd [368 ITR 487] 7] The assessee submits that the addition u/s 68 of Rs.5,12,02,695 made by the A.O. by holding that the entire cash deposits made in bank account with Renuka Mata Credit Co-op. Society are to be treated as unexplained cash credits without appreciating that the said cash deposits represented turnover of business of the assessee which was already…