Vedabhai v. Santaram

253 ITR 798Supreme Court of India2002#316 most cited

What is Vedabhai v. Santaram authority for?

When substantial justice and technical considerations are in conflict, substantial justice should be prioritized. Condoning delay requires a cautious approach without malafide or dilatory tactics, and 'sufficient cause' should be interpreted liberally to advance substantial justice.

262

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vedabhai v. Santaram · 253 ITR 798 · condonation of delay · sufficient cause · substantial justice · technical consideration · limitation act · section 5 Limitation Act · liberal construction

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 80GSection 147Section 12ABSection 144Section 142(1)

Issues it is cited on

condonation of delayreasonable causesection 80gsection 12opportunity of being heardsection 27section 271section 25interestsection 142(1)prescribedindia

Judgments citing Vedabhai v. Santaram

Mass Awash Private Limited, Lucknow vs. Addi. CIT International Taxation, Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 165/DEL/2021[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 156Section 195Section 201(1)Section 271C(1)(a)Section 275(1)(C)Section 275(1)(c)

…the appeal within the prescribed time and this has always been understood to mean that the explanation has to cover the whole of the period of delay. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Veda Bai alias Vaijayanta Bai Baburao Patil vs. Shantaram Baburao and ors. 253 ITR 798 (SC) held that in exercising the discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor so…

Mass Awash Private Limited, Lucknow vs. Addi. CIT International Taxation, Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 164/DEL/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 156Section 195Section 201(1)Section 271C(1)(a)Section 275(1)(C)Section 275(1)(c)

…the appeal within the prescribed time and this has always been understood to mean that the explanation has to cover the whole of the period of delay. 11. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Veda Bai alias Vaijayanta Bai Baburao Patil vs. Shantaram Baburao and ors. 253 ITR 798 (SC) held that in exercising the discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor so…

Conplex Telecom India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 4(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1951/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 145Section 145(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…the appeal within the prescribed time and this has always been understood to mean that the explanation has to cover the whole of the period of delay. 10. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Veda Bai alias Vaijayanta Bai Baburao Patil vs. Shantaram Baburao and ors. 253 ITR 798 (SC) held that in exercising the discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a 4 case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor…

Guru Teg Bahadur Educational Trust, Jalandhar vs. Commissioner of Income Tax ( Exemptions), Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 264/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. K. Bhagat, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 5

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T. A. No. 264/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Guru Teg Bahadur V. The Commissioner of Income Educational Trust, Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh Gurudwara Thara Sahib, Vill. Hazara, Distt.- Jalandhar [PAN: AAATG 9403B] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. K. Bhagat, CA Respondent by : Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 27.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 14.03.2023 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The present appeal has been f…

A V G. Impex Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 952/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2015-16 Avg Impex Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, 301, Commercial Complex, Ward-1(1), Plot No.20, Shivam Tower, New Delhi. Paschim Vihar, New Delhi. Pan: Aabca8847M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.11.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 17.06.2019 Of The Cit(A)-1, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Application Of The Assessee To Transfer The Appeal To Smc Bench Was Not Allowed & It Was Directed To Continue The Hearing Of The Appeal Before The Division Bench. On Perusal Of The Record, We Find That This Appeal Can Be Disposed Of In Absence Of The Assessee After Hearing The Argument Of The Ld. Sr. Dr. Therefore, We Proceeded To Adjudicate The Appeal.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Kanav Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)

…ause has successfully demonstrated and established a bona fide and sufficient cause for the delay of 87 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vedabai Alias V.B.Patil Vs. SB. Patil & Others (2007) 253 ITR 798 (SC) also stresses upon condonation of delay only in the event of sufficient cause explaining the delay. Therefore, in our considered opinion, the ld.CIT(A) was not right in denying condonation of delay of 87 days in filing the appeal before him to the assessee. Therefore, the delay by the assessee of 87 days in filing the appeal before the 4 ld.…

Bharatkumar Somabhai Patel, Banashkantha vs. The ITO, Ward-4, Palanpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed as in limine

ITA 389/AHD/2020[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Oct 2022AY 2007-08
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

…e. In the instant case, the appellant failed to show any sufficient reason, .which has prevented it to file the appeal within, stipulated time. Further, Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vedabai Alias Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil Vs. Shantararn Baburao Patil, 253 ITR 798, has held as follows:- "In exercising discretion, under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the Court should adopt a programmatic approach. A distinction be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant fact…

Reetesh Kumar, Baran vs. ITO Wad Baran, Baran

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

ITA 231/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sharvan Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 56

…t has again reiterated that the expression "sufficient cause" should receive a liberal construction. The Hon'ble court have also held that advancing of substantial justice should be of prime importance. Kindly refer Vedbai vs. Shantaram Baburam Patil & Others 253 ITR 798 (SC). Prayer: In view of above facts and circumstance and with the sympathy and settled legal position, the delay so caused may kindly be condoned. To this effect, the assessee has filed an affidavit to condone the delay in view of the above prayers made above by him. 2.2 During the course of hearing, the ld. DR has objected to the assessee’s ap…

Sri. M. Nagaraja, Mysore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1), Mysore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1905/BANG/2019[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Sept 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 1999-2000

For Respondent: Shri S. Parthasarathi
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234BSection 263

…case, the delay was that of 38 days and in considering the issue, the jurisdictional High court had considered the following decision of the Apex Court:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vedabai alias Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil (2002) 253 ITR 798 held as under (page 799): “In exercising discretion, under section 5 of the Limitation Act the courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case, the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevan…

M/S. Neesa Technologies Ltd, Ahmedabad vs. The DCIT Central Circle-2(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal is dismissed as not entertained

ITA 426/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Jun 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Abimanyu Singh Bhati, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ajai Pratap Singh, CIT/DR &
Section 143(3)Section 249Section 250(6)Section 271E

…Statutes. The behavior of the assessee could be termed as personified in action and negligence which would not constitute reasonable cause. 5.1 Further, Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vedabal Alias Vaijayaaatabai Baburao Patll Vs. Shantaram Baburao Patil, 253 ITR 798, it was held as follows;- “In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act, the Court should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant…

Prafulchabndra Bhaichandbhai Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, WD.2(3)(3), Surat

ITA 104/SRT/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.104/Srt/2021 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Virtual Court Hearing) Prafulchandra Bhaichandbhai Patel, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bharthana (Vesu), Via-Althan, Taluka 2(3)(3), Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Choryasi, Surat-395007 Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Azcpd7755Q (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Singla– Sr.DR
Section 143(3)

…scretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression "sufficient cause", the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. (VideVedabai alias Vaijaya-natabai Baburao Patil v. Shanta-ram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798 (SC.)) 6. A Division Bench of this court in which one of us was a party (P. D. Dinakaran J.) in Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Deputy CIT [2006] 280 ITR 357 has also held that no hard and fast rule can be laid down in the matter of condonation of delay and the courts should adopt a pragmatic approach and the courts should exercise their discretion…

Sandeepkumar Mithulal Mehta, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(3)(10), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1002/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1002/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Sandeepkumar Mithulal Mehta, I.T.O., 7, Rajasthan Society, Vs. Ward-3(3)(10), Opp. Meghdoot Petrol Pump, Ahmedabad. Sahibaug, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Goyal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana Sr. DR
Section 5

…ufficient cause for condoning the delay. In this regard we note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that : “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798 held as under: "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will be a relevant factor so…

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)

…e other hand, Ld. DR in case there is a delay of few days the matter may be considered but not for such inordinate delay as per the present case. By relying on the decision in the case of Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil and Ors.[(2002) 253 ITR 798 5 ITA.NOs. 96 & 97/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2002-03) KNP Securities Pvt. Ltd., (SC)], he submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court distinguished the inordinate delay v. few days. Further, Ld. DR submitted that assessee has filed the relevant appeal fee and why it has not filed the appeal on time, the reasons recorded and claimed by the assessee is not prop…

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)

…e other hand, Ld. DR in case there is a delay of few days the matter may be considered but not for such inordinate delay as per the present case. By relying on the decision in the case of Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil and Ors.[(2002) 253 ITR 798 5 ITA.NOs. 96 & 97/MUM/2021 (A.Y: 2002-03) KNP Securities Pvt. Ltd., (SC)], he submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court distinguished the inordinate delay v. few days. Further, Ld. DR submitted that assessee has filed the relevant appeal fee and why it has not filed the appeal on time, the reasons recorded and claimed by the assessee is not prop…

AO (SC), Avvnl, Sikar vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC (TDS), Ghajiabad

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1349/JPR/2018[2013-14 , 24Q]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur14 Feb 2022
For Appellant: Shri Ankur Salgia (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 1Section 200ASection 234Section 234ESection 250

…appellant cite judgments in support of his contention:- (a) Improvement Trust v. Ujagar Singh [2010] 6 SCC 786. (b) Poonja Arcade v. Asstt. CIT [2010] 326 ITR 123/191 Taxman 291 (Kar.) (c) Vedabai Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patii [2002] 253 ITR 798/122 Taxman 114 (SC) In view of the fact that the appeal was filed after the limitation period but the same was due to the reason beyond the control of the appellant/applicant, it is requested that delay in filing the appeal be condoned. Also the applicant/appellant cited judgment in case of State of Bihar Vs Kameshwar Prasad Singh (AIR 2000 SC 20…

Sant Solider Engineers and Contractors Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC-TDS, Ghazibad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 30/ASR/2021[2014-15,Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

…and receiving of orders through emails and other modes. There seems to be no malafide intention of the assessee to make delay in filing the appeal. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vedabhai alias Vijaya Bali Babu Rao Patil v. Santaram Baburac Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798 has held that, “the Court has to exercise its direcretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind and construing the expression sufficient cause the principles of advancement and I.T.A Nos. 26 to 30/ASR/2021 7 substantial justice is of prime importance. The expression sufficient cause should receive a liberal consideration.” 11. Examining the…

Sant Solider Engineers and Contractors Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax CPC-TDS, Ghazibad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 29/ASR/2021[2014-15.Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

…and receiving of orders through emails and other modes. There seems to be no malafide intention of the assessee to make delay in filing the appeal. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vedabhai alias Vijaya Bali Babu Rao Patil v. Santaram Baburac Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798 has held that, “the Court has to exercise its direcretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind and construing the expression sufficient cause the principles of advancement and I.T.A Nos. 26 to 30/ASR/2021 7 substantial justice is of prime importance. The expression sufficient cause should receive a liberal consideration.” 11. Examining the…

Sant Soldier Engineers and Contrctors Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax .CPC-TDS, Ghazibad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 28/ASR/2021[2013-14.Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

…and receiving of orders through emails and other modes. There seems to be no malafide intention of the assessee to make delay in filing the appeal. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vedabhai alias Vijaya Bali Babu Rao Patil v. Santaram Baburac Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798 has held that, “the Court has to exercise its direcretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind and construing the expression sufficient cause the principles of advancement and I.T.A Nos. 26 to 30/ASR/2021 7 substantial justice is of prime importance. The expression sufficient cause should receive a liberal consideration.” 11. Examining the…

Sant Soldier Engineers and Contractors Private Limited, Jalandhar vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 26/ASR/2021[2013-14,Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

…and receiving of orders through emails and other modes. There seems to be no malafide intention of the assessee to make delay in filing the appeal. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vedabhai alias Vijaya Bali Babu Rao Patil v. Santaram Baburac Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798 has held that, “the Court has to exercise its direcretion on the facts of each case keeping in mind and construing the expression sufficient cause the principles of advancement and I.T.A Nos. 26 to 30/ASR/2021 7 substantial justice is of prime importance. The expression sufficient cause should receive a liberal consideration.” 11. Examining the…

Interio Planet, Kota vs. CPC Income Tax Or ITO, Kota

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

ITA 86/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 86/Jp/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Cuke Interio Planet, Cpc, Income Tax Or Ito, 12, Arihant Plaza, Near Post Office, Vs. Kota. Dadabari, Kota-324009 (Raj). Pan No.: Aaffi 8208 K Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv.) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Jcit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 15/11/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 25/11/2021 Vkns'K@ Order

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 143(1)Section 234Section 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “B”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 86/JP/2021 Assessment Year: 2018-19 cuke Interio Planet, CPC, Income Tax or ITO, 12, Arihant Plaza, Near Post Office, Vs. Kota. Dadabari, Kota-324009 (Raj). PAN No.: AAFFI 8208 K vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Shravan Kr. Gupta (Adv.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT) lquokbZ dh…

M/S. Oriental Bank of Commerce, Huru vs. ITO, TDS-3, Jaipur

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

ITA 250/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 247 To 250/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Years :2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S Oriental Bank Of Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Commerce, Tds-3, Post Box No. 56, Sardarsahar, Jaipur. Churu. Tan No. Jpro01610A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/10/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Bench All These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur All Dated 08/01/2019 For The A.Ys. 2013-14 To 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES “A”, JAIPUR Jh lanhi x®lkÃa] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 247 to 250/JP/2020 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years :2013-14 to 2016-17 M/s Oriental Bank of cuke I.T.O., Vs. Commerce, TDS-3, Post Box No. 56, Sardarsahar, Jaipur. Churu. TAN No. JPRO01610A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT) lq…