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.

How many judgments cite Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr?

291 judgments on BharatTax cite Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr (398 ITR 250), spanning 2018 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 1961, Section 143(3), Section 253(1), Section 144, Section 153C.

Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr (398 ITR 250)

Jaikisan Samitrai Ganwani, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 798/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 143(3)

…dispose of the appeals ex parte qua the assessee. 4. The moot point is as to whether such a long delay deserves condonation. At this stage, it is relevant to note the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr (2017) 398 ITR 250 (Bom) holding that none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal. In that case, delay of 2984 days crept in due to improper legal advice. Relying on Concord of India Ins. Co. Limited VS Nirmala Devi (1979) 118 ITR 507 (SC), the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Cou…

Jaikisan Samirtai Ganwani, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 797/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 143(3)

…dispose of the appeals ex parte qua the assessee. 4. The moot point is as to whether such a long delay deserves condonation. At this stage, it is relevant to note the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr (2017) 398 ITR 250 (Bom) holding that none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal. In that case, delay of 2984 days crept in due to improper legal advice. Relying on Concord of India Ins. Co. Limited VS Nirmala Devi (1979) 118 ITR 507 (SC), the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Cou…

Jaikisan Samitrai Ganwani, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 793/PUN/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 143(3)

…dispose of the appeals ex parte qua the assessee. 4. The moot point is as to whether such a long delay deserves condonation. At this stage, it is relevant to note the judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr (2017) 398 ITR 250 (Bom) holding that none should be deprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal. In that case, delay of 2984 days crept in due to improper legal advice. Relying on Concord of India Ins. Co. Limited VS Nirmala Devi (1979) 118 ITR 507 (SC), the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Cou…