Vijay Vishin Meghani v. DCIT

389 ITR 250High Court2017#746 most cited

What is Vijay Vishin Meghani v. DCIT authority for?

In matters concerning condonation of delay, courts must adopt an overall view in the larger interest of justice, prioritizing substantial justice over mere technicalities. Adjudication on merits should not be denied unless the delay in filing an appeal is found to be deliberate, intentional, careless, negligent, or the litigant's conduct clearly lacks bona fides.

137

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,368 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vijay Vishin Meghani v. DCIT · condonation of delay · delay in filing appeal · Income-tax Act · 1961 · Section 250 · substantial justice · larger interest of justice · bona fide conduct · deliberate delay · negligent conduct · adjudication on merits · High Court decision

Also reported as

86 Taxmann.com 9898 ITD 259

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 250Section 147Section 143(3)Section 148Section 144BSection 250(6)Section 139(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 271h(3)section 272a(2)section 271hsection 272section 200a(1)section 272asection 200(3)section 200asection 234esection 200delay in filing appealcondonation of delay

Judgments citing Vijay Vishin Meghani v. DCIT

ITO Ward-4(3), Hyderabad vs. Viswabharati Mutually Aided Co- Operative Credit Society Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 363/HYD/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 80P

…CIT(A), matter may kindly be remitted back to the authorities below for afresh adjudication. In support of his case, Ld. AR filed the following decisions : • Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT – 398 ITR 250 of Bombay High Court. • Royal Airways Lts Vs. Addl.CIT – 98 ITD 259 – Delhi High Court. • All India Primary Teachers Federation Vs. DIT (Exemptions), 93 TTJ 155 – Delhi High Court. • Angela J. Kazi Vs. ITO – 10 SOT 139 of Mumbai Tribunal. • Smt. Rameshwari Devi and another Vs. Sansar Chand and others – AIR 1986 Himachal Pradesh. • Nosegay Public School Management Committee Vs. CIT – 58 SOT 185 of Jodhpur Bench. •…

Viswabharati Mutually Aided Co- Operative Credit Society Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 362/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 80P

…CIT(A), matter may kindly be remitted back to the authorities below for afresh adjudication. In support of his case, Ld. AR filed the following decisions : • Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT – 398 ITR 250 of Bombay High Court. • Royal Airways Lts Vs. Addl.CIT – 98 ITD 259 – Delhi High Court. • All India Primary Teachers Federation Vs. DIT (Exemptions), 93 TTJ 155 – Delhi High Court. • Angela J. Kazi Vs. ITO – 10 SOT 139 of Mumbai Tribunal. • Smt. Rameshwari Devi and another Vs. Sansar Chand and others – AIR 1986 Himachal Pradesh. • Nosegay Public School Management Committee Vs. CIT – 58 SOT 185 of Jodhpur Bench. •…

Viswabharati Mutually Aided Co- Operative Credit Society Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 361/HYD/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 80P

…CIT(A), matter may kindly be remitted back to the authorities below for afresh adjudication. In support of his case, Ld. AR filed the following decisions : • Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT – 398 ITR 250 of Bombay High Court. • Royal Airways Lts Vs. Addl.CIT – 98 ITD 259 – Delhi High Court. • All India Primary Teachers Federation Vs. DIT (Exemptions), 93 TTJ 155 – Delhi High Court. • Angela J. Kazi Vs. ITO – 10 SOT 139 of Mumbai Tribunal. • Smt. Rameshwari Devi and another Vs. Sansar Chand and others – AIR 1986 Himachal Pradesh. • Nosegay Public School Management Committee Vs. CIT – 58 SOT 185 of Jodhpur Bench. •…

Viswabharati Mutually Aided Co- Operative Credit Society Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO, Ward-4(3), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA

ITA 360/HYD/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad13 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri K.C. DevdasFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Adithya
Section 80P

…CIT(A), matter may kindly be remitted back to the authorities below for afresh adjudication. In support of his case, Ld. AR filed the following decisions : • Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT – 398 ITR 250 of Bombay High Court. • Royal Airways Lts Vs. Addl.CIT – 98 ITD 259 – Delhi High Court. • All India Primary Teachers Federation Vs. DIT (Exemptions), 93 TTJ 155 – Delhi High Court. • Angela J. Kazi Vs. ITO – 10 SOT 139 of Mumbai Tribunal. • Smt. Rameshwari Devi and another Vs. Sansar Chand and others – AIR 1986 Himachal Pradesh. • Nosegay Public School Management Committee Vs. CIT – 58 SOT 185 of Jodhpur Bench. •…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1043/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1042/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1041/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1040/CHNY/2022[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1039/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1038/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1037/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

M/S Gopuram Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. ITO, TDS CPC, Ghaziabad

In the result, all appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1036/CHNY/2022[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Chennai31 Jan 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., V. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, Tds, Cpc, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [Pan: Aaacs 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By Mr.R.Devaraj, Adv. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.01.2023

For Respondent: Mr.D.Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 154Section 200Section 200ASection 234Section 234E

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, माननीय "ाियक सद" एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.1036-1039, 1040-1047 & 1048-1053/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/s.Gopuram Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., v. The Income Tax Officer, New No.31, Lazarus Church Road, TDS, CPC, R.A.Puram, Ghaziabad. Chennai-600 028. [PAN: AAACS 9903 R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क" ओर से…

Bharat Pradhan, Darjeeling vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Darjeeling

ITA 87/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No. 87/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Bharat Pradhan, ...................................Appellant Chandra Bhawan, Bloomfield Cess Road, Dali, Darjeeling-734101, West Bengal [Pan: Aenpp6778B] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,..............................Respondent Ward-3(3), Darjeeling, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & Dist. Darjeeling, Pin-734101 Appearances By: Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : January 16, 2023 O R D E R

Section 50C(2)

…ons beyond the control of the appellant, the appellant would also rely on the order of jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Vinod Asarwal vs Pr CTT (2018) 61 ITR (Trib) 598 (Kol). 10) The Hon’ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Royal Airways Ltd. vs. ADIT, [2006] 98 ITD 259 (Del) condoned the delay of 9 to 11 years in filing appeals by holding as under : “20. ……..It is not a case where the assessee could expect to have derived any mileage on account of the matter getting delayed. The delay in filing of appeals has caused prejudice to no one else except the assessee himself. When we keep these facts in mind, the bona…

Puran Pradhan, Darjeeling vs. ITO, Ward-3(3), Darjeeling

ITA 86/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Dec 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 86/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Puran Pradhan, ...................................Appellant Chandra Bhawan, Bloomfield Cess Road, Dali, Darjeeling-734101, West Bengal [Pan: Aqdpp2162M] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,..............................Respondent Ward-3(3), Darjeeling, Office Of The Income Tax Officer, A.J.C. Bose Road, P.O. & Dist. Darjeeling, Pin-734101 Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Smt. Mita Rizvi, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit (D.R.), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 250

…ons beyond the control of the appellant, the appellant would also rely on the order of jurisdictional Tribunal in the case of Vinod Asarwal vs Pr CTT (2018) 61 ITR (Trib) 598 (Kol). 10) The Hon’ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Royal Airways Ltd. vs. ADIT, [2006] 98 ITD 259 (Del) condoned the delay of 9 to 11 years in filing appeals by holding as under : 3 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Puran Pradhan, Darjeeling “20. ……..It is not a case where the assessee could expect to have derived any mileage on account of the matter getting delayed. The delay in filing of appeals has caused prejudice to no one else except the ass…

Allacode Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer - (TDS - 1), Pune

In the result, ground of appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 582/PUN/2022[2015-16 ( 26Q - Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysr.No. Ita No. Asstt. Year Quarter/Form 1. 565/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q2/24Q 2. 566/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q3/24Q 3. 567/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q4/24Q 4. 568/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/24Q 5. 569/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/24Q 6. 570/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q/3/24Q 7. 571/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/24Q 8. 572/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/26Q 9. 573/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/26Q 10. 574/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q3/26Q 11. 575/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/26Q 12. 576/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/24Q 13. 577/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 14. 578/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q3/24Q 15. 579/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/24Q 16. 580/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/26Q 17. 581/Punb/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 18. 582/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/26Q

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 200ASection 234E

…y 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.” 11. Similarly, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani vs. DCIT, 389 ITR 250 (Bom.) held that in the matter of condonation of delay an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken. None should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/Appellate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, neg…

Allacode Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer- (TDS - 1), Pune

In the result, ground of appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 581/PUN/2022[2015-16 (26Q - Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysr.No. Ita No. Asstt. Year Quarter/Form 1. 565/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q2/24Q 2. 566/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q3/24Q 3. 567/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q4/24Q 4. 568/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/24Q 5. 569/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/24Q 6. 570/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q/3/24Q 7. 571/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/24Q 8. 572/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/26Q 9. 573/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/26Q 10. 574/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q3/26Q 11. 575/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/26Q 12. 576/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/24Q 13. 577/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 14. 578/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q3/24Q 15. 579/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/24Q 16. 580/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/26Q 17. 581/Punb/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 18. 582/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/26Q

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 200ASection 234E

…y 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.” 11. Similarly, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani vs. DCIT, 389 ITR 250 (Bom.) held that in the matter of condonation of delay an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken. None should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/Appellate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, neg…

Allacode Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer- (TDS-1), Pune

In the result, ground of appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 580/PUN/2022[2015-16 (26Q - Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysr.No. Ita No. Asstt. Year Quarter/Form 1. 565/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q2/24Q 2. 566/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q3/24Q 3. 567/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q4/24Q 4. 568/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/24Q 5. 569/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/24Q 6. 570/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q/3/24Q 7. 571/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/24Q 8. 572/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/26Q 9. 573/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/26Q 10. 574/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q3/26Q 11. 575/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/26Q 12. 576/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/24Q 13. 577/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 14. 578/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q3/24Q 15. 579/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/24Q 16. 580/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/26Q 17. 581/Punb/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 18. 582/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/26Q

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 200ASection 234E

…y 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.” 11. Similarly, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani vs. DCIT, 389 ITR 250 (Bom.) held that in the matter of condonation of delay an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken. None should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/Appellate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, neg…

Allacode Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer- (TDS- 1), Pune

In the result, ground of appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 579/PUN/2022[2015-16 (24Q Q -4)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysr.No. Ita No. Asstt. Year Quarter/Form 1. 565/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q2/24Q 2. 566/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q3/24Q 3. 567/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q4/24Q 4. 568/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/24Q 5. 569/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/24Q 6. 570/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q/3/24Q 7. 571/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/24Q 8. 572/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/26Q 9. 573/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/26Q 10. 574/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q3/26Q 11. 575/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/26Q 12. 576/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/24Q 13. 577/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 14. 578/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q3/24Q 15. 579/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/24Q 16. 580/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/26Q 17. 581/Punb/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 18. 582/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/26Q

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 200ASection 234E

…y 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.” 11. Similarly, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani vs. DCIT, 389 ITR 250 (Bom.) held that in the matter of condonation of delay an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken. None should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/Appellate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, neg…

Allacode Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer- (TDS- 1), Pune

In the result, ground of appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 578/PUN/2022[2015-16 (24Q Q -3)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysr.No. Ita No. Asstt. Year Quarter/Form 1. 565/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q2/24Q 2. 566/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q3/24Q 3. 567/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q4/24Q 4. 568/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/24Q 5. 569/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/24Q 6. 570/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q/3/24Q 7. 571/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/24Q 8. 572/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/26Q 9. 573/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/26Q 10. 574/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q3/26Q 11. 575/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/26Q 12. 576/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/24Q 13. 577/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 14. 578/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q3/24Q 15. 579/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/24Q 16. 580/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/26Q 17. 581/Punb/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 18. 582/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/26Q

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 200ASection 234E

…y 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.” 11. Similarly, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani vs. DCIT, 389 ITR 250 (Bom.) held that in the matter of condonation of delay an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken. None should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/Appellate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, neg…

Allacode Technology Solutions Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer- (TDS- 1), Pune

In the result, ground of appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 577/PUN/2022[26Q/Quarter-2/2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysr.No. Ita No. Asstt. Year Quarter/Form 1. 565/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q2/24Q 2. 566/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q3/24Q 3. 567/Pun/2022 2013-14 Q4/24Q 4. 568/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/24Q 5. 569/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/24Q 6. 570/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q/3/24Q 7. 571/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/24Q 8. 572/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q1/26Q 9. 573/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q2/26Q 10. 574/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q3/26Q 11. 575/Pun/2022 2014-15 Q4/26Q 12. 576/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/24Q 13. 577/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 14. 578/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q3/24Q 15. 579/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/24Q 16. 580/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q1/26Q 17. 581/Punb/2022 2015-16 Q2/26Q 18. 582/Pun/2022 2015-16 Q4/26Q

For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav
Section 200ASection 234E

…y 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.” 11. Similarly, the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Vishin Meghani vs. DCIT, 389 ITR 250 (Bom.) held that in the matter of condonation of delay an overall view in the larger interest of justice has to be taken. None should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless the Court of law or the Tribunal/Appellate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, neg…