Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr

398 ITR 250High Court2017#269 most cited

What is Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr authority for?

This case is cited as an authority supporting the condonation of delay in filing income tax appeals, particularly when an assessee presents a request for such condonation.

291

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Vishin Meghani v. DCIT · 398 ITR 250 · condonation of delay · appeal filing delay · Section 253(1) · Section 249(2) · delay in income tax appeal · sufficient cause for delay · income tax appeals · limitation period for appeals · Bombay High Court 2017

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 1961Section 143(3)Section 253(1)Section 144Section 153CSection 148Section 1963

Issues it is cited on

section 253(1)section 200a(1)(c)section 200a(1)section 200(3)delay in filing appealsection 249(2)section 12ab(1)section 200section 200asection 234esection 246asection 249

Judgments citing Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr

Pdkv Research and Incubation Foundation, Akola vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES

ITA 235/NAG/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 235/Nag/2023 Pdkv Research & Incubation Foundation Krishi Nagar, Shivani Airport Area, Akola-444004 Pan:Aakcp6318F . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 8Section 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(vi)

…ome-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. 2. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 57 days delay in instituting this appeal, in the larger interest of justice 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 delay. ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 3 PDKV Research & Incubation Foundation 3. Briefly stated facts borne out of the case records are; 3.1 The appellant is a section 8 company incorporated under the provisions of Companie…

Rai Udyog Ltd., Nagpur vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Nagpur

In the result, these twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 312/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 311 & 312/Nag/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rai Udyog Limited 1, Rajat Sankul, Opp. Bus Stand, Ganesh Peth, Nagpur-440018 Pan: Aaccr6008G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer (Tds) Hq-1 / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds), Nagpur . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By These Twin Appeals The Assessee Challenged Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044245542(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1044244849(1) Both Dt. 28/07/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2014-15 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 154Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 24Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 271C

…capable of suggesting us that the delay in filing these twin appeals by the appellant is deliberate. Therefore, this technical reason should not take away the right of appellant to contest its case on merits. In ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ ITAT-Nagpur Page 4 of 5 Rai Udyog Limited ITA No.311 & 312/NAG/2022 reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), their Hon’ble Lordship have categorically held that, ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed t…

M/S. Rai Udyog Ltd., Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Nagpur

In the result, these twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 311 & 312/Nag/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rai Udyog Limited 1, Rajat Sankul, Opp. Bus Stand, Ganesh Peth, Nagpur-440018 Pan: Aaccr6008G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer (Tds) Hq-1 / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds), Nagpur . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By These Twin Appeals The Assessee Challenged Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044245542(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1044244849(1) Both Dt. 28/07/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2014-15 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 154Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 24Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 271C

…capable of suggesting us that the delay in filing these twin appeals by the appellant is deliberate. Therefore, this technical reason should not take away the right of appellant to contest its case on merits. In ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250 (Bom) and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Others’ ITAT-Nagpur Page 4 of 5 Rai Udyog Limited ITA No.311 & 312/NAG/2022 reported at 167 ITR 5 (SC), their Hon’ble Lordship have categorically held that, ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed t…

Shri Saraswati Education Society, Akola vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL

ITA 231/NAG/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 225 & 231/Nag/2023 Shri Saraswati Education Society Tirupati Tantra Niketan, Keshav Nagar, Akola-444001 Pan:Aafas3857B . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemption, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 20/03/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Twin Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [‘Cit(E)’] Both Dt. 30/03/2023 Passed U/S 12Ab(4) & 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Respectively.

For Appellant: Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

…se are heard together for a common and consolidated order. 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 49 & 56 days delay in instituting these appeals, we after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs.DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250(Bom) & ‘Collector, Land ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 4 Shri Saraswati Education Society Vs CIT(E) ITA No.225 & 231/PUN/2023 Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Ors’ [167 ITR 5 (SC)], deem it fit to condone the delay requoting that ‘none should be deprived of adjudication on merits unless found that the filing of appeal is deliberately de…

Pdkv Research and Incubation Foundation, Akola vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSE

ITA 230/NAG/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 230/Nag/2023 Pdkv Research & Incubation Foundation Krishi Nagar, Shivani Airport Area, Akola-444004 Pan:Aakcp6318F . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 8

…ome-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. 2. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 56 days delay in instituting this appeal, in the larger interest of justice 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 delay. ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 4 PDKV Research & Incubation Foundation 3. Briefly stated facts borne out of the case records are; 3.1 The appellant is a section 8 company incorporated under the provisions of Companie…

Hasamseth Pablik Laybrari and Cheritebal Trust, Akola vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL

ITA 229/NAG/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 226 & 229/Nag/2023 Hasamseth Pablik Laybrari & Cheritebal Trust Tasjna Peth, Subhash Chowk, Akola-444001 Pan:Aabth4733N . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

…tset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 46 & 50 days delay in instituting these twin appeals, we after placing reliance on ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 4 ITA No.226 & 229/PUN/2023 12AB & 80G(5) ‘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)], deem it fit to condone the delay requoting that ‘none should be deprived of adjudication on merits unless found that the filing of appeal is deliberately delayed.’ 4. Briefly stated facts borne out of these case records are; 4.1 The assessee is r…

Hasamseth Pablik Laybrari and Cheritebal Trust, Akola vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL

ITA 226/NAG/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 226 & 229/Nag/2023 Hasamseth Pablik Laybrari & Cheritebal Trust Tasjna Peth, Subhash Chowk, Akola-444001 Pan:Aabth4733N . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

…tset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 46 & 50 days delay in instituting these twin appeals, we after placing reliance on ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 4 ITA No.226 & 229/PUN/2023 12AB & 80G(5) ‘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)], deem it fit to condone the delay requoting that ‘none should be deprived of adjudication on merits unless found that the filing of appeal is deliberately delayed.’ 4. Briefly stated facts borne out of these case records are; 4.1 The assessee is r…

Shri Sarawati Education Society, Akola vs. CIT Exemption, Pune

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL

ITA 225/NAG/2023[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 225 & 231/Nag/2023 Shri Saraswati Education Society Tirupati Tantra Niketan, Keshav Nagar, Akola-444001 Pan:Aafas3857B . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Commissioner Of Income Tax Exemption, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 20/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 20/03/2024 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Present Twin Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune [‘Cit(E)’] Both Dt. 30/03/2023 Passed U/S 12Ab(4) & 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] Respectively.

For Appellant: Mr Mahavir Atal [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr K C Kanojiya [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

…se are heard together for a common and consolidated order. 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate 49 & 56 days delay in instituting these appeals, we after placing reliance on ‘Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs.DCIT & Anr’ reported 398 ITR 250(Bom) & ‘Collector, Land ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 4 Shri Saraswati Education Society Vs CIT(E) ITA No.225 & 231/PUN/2023 Acquisition, Anantnag and Anr. Vs Ms Katiji and Ors’ [167 ITR 5 (SC)], deem it fit to condone the delay requoting that ‘none should be deprived of adjudication on merits unless found that the filing of appeal is deliberately de…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe Proprietor Abhijeet Engineers, Pune vs. ITO, TDS Pune, Pune

ITA 1309/PUN/2023[2015-16 Q1 (FORM 27EQ)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe Proprietor Abhijeet Engineers, Pune vs. ITO, TDS Pune, Pune

ITA 1308/PUN/2023[2015-16 Q2 (FORM 24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. ITO, TDS Pune, Pune

ITA 1307/PUN/2023[2015-16 Q1 (FORM 24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1306/PUN/2023[2015-16 (Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1305/PUN/2023[2015-16 (Q3-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1304/PUN/2023[2015-16 (Q2-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1303/PUN/2023[2015-16 (Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1302/PUN/2023[2014-15 (Q4-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1301/PUN/2023[2014-15 (Q4-24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1300/PUN/2023[2014-15 (Q3-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Incom Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1299/PUN/2023[2014-15 (Q2-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…

Dadasaheb Vitthalrao Urhe, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS, Pune

ITA 1298/PUN/2023[2014-15 (Q1-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Feb 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 1286 To 1309/Pun/2023 / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2015-16 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe 5, Abhijeet Engineers, Panchwati Colony, Talegaon Dabhade, Pune-410506 Pan:Aaapu9881D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Income Tax Officer, Tds, Pune. . . . . . . .प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 28/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 29/02/2024 आदेश / Order Per Bench; The Present Bunch Of Twenty Four Appeals Of The Assessee Are Assailed Against Respective Orders Of First Appellate Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short ‘Nfac’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short ‘The Act’], Which Ascended Out Of Respective Orders Of Intimation/Rectification Processed By The Cit/Cpc-Tds, Pune [For Short ‘Ao’] For Various Quarters Pertaining To The Assessment Years [For Short ‘Ay’] 2013-14 To 2015-16. 2. Since The Facts & Solitary Issue Involved In This Bunch Of Appeals Are Identical, On The Request Of Rival Parties, For The Sake Of Brevity These Are Heard Together For A Common & Consolidated Order.

For Appellant: Mr Rohit Tapadiya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ramnath Murkunde [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234ESection 250

…6 Dadasaheb Vittalrao Urhe Vs ITO(TDS) ITA No.1286 to 1309/PUN/2023 3. At the outset, after vouching sufficiency of reasons beyond undeliberate delay in instituting these appeals, 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), deem it fit to condone the delay holding that ‘none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal.’ 2. Without reproducing the grounds of appeal, it shall…