“Section 294(4)”

Section References (mined)Section 294Section 294(4)5 judgments

PANEERSELVAM SUBRAMANIAM,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-5(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3068/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. Sanjay Aravind, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl.CIT

Section 249(4)Section 294(4)

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एबी टी. वक", "ाियक

AYESHABEE BABU KHAN,MANKHURED vs. ITO 27 1 1 MUMBAI, VASHI NAVI MUMBAI

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

ITA 2887/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiyashri Sandeep Singh Karhailayeshabee Babu Khan, 1, Mankhured Station Road, T.F. Donar S.O., Mumbai – 400088 ............... Appellant Pan : Cgopk4227M V/S Ito – 27(1)(1), Vashi Railway Station, ……………… Respondent 3X7X Gqp 3Rd & 4Th Floor, 6Th Tower Complex Vashi, Navi Mumbai. Assessee By : Shri Bhupendra Shah Revenue By : Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Bhupendra ShahFor Respondent: Shri Aditya M. Rai, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249Section 249(4)Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 251

file of the learned CIT(A), granting one more opportunity to the assessee to make necessary compliance with the provisions of section 294(4) of the Act before the learned CIT(A). The learned CIT(A) is directed to consider any such request from the assessee in accordance with

RUSSELL ADRIAN RODRIGUES ,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD 23(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 98/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm & Shri Girish Agrawal, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No98/Mum/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2017-2018) Russel Adrian Rodrigues, Vs. Ito, Ward-23(3)(1), 101, Diiago, “B” Sherly Ranjan Mumbai Road, Bandra West, Mumbai "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. : Adwpr 7259 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Subhash Chhajed, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/02/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/02/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm : The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Impugned Order Dated 28/12/2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act (“The Act”) By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“Learned Cit(A)”], For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds: – 1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Dismissing The Assessee'S Appeal On Account Of Non-Compliance Of Section 249(4)(A) & 249(4)(B) Of The It Act., 1961 Completely Disregarding The Fact That Assessee Has Filed The Return & Paid The Due Tax Thereon As Mentioned In The Column 8.1 Of The Appeal Form No. 35. The Appellant Therefore Prays To Remand Back The Matter To Hon. Cit(A) For A Fresh Adjudication On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri Subhash Chhajed, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr.DR

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(4)Section 249(4)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)

noted above, we are of the considered view that the assessee has duly satisfied the conditions laid down in the provisions of section 294(4) of the Act and the impugned order dismissing the appeal on the ground of non-compliance of the aforesaid provisions cannot be sustained. Accordingly

RAKESH JAGANNATH GUTA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 12(5), PUNE, PUNE

ITA 797/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.797/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Section 249(4)(b)Section 294(4)(b)

correct the typographical error crept in the Tribunal order dated 10.06.2024 in mentioning the section. In Para Nos.3 and 7 of the order, section 294(4)(b) was mentioned inadvertently instead of section 249(4)(b). Therefore, the same may be read as section 249(4)(b). (S. S. VISWANETHRA

MADRESA HIMAYATUL ISLAM BACHCHON KA GHAR,BARDOLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, SURAT

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 279/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Surat02 Jan 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Madresa Himayatul Islam Bachchon Ka I.T.O. Ghar, Exemption Ward, Vs. Ground Floor Bachchon Ka Ghar, Surat. Kadod, Bardoli-394335. Pan No. Aadtm 1802 F Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 12ASection 133(6)Section 144Section 249Section 249(4)Section 254(1)Section 69A

being heard. The assessee is also directed to move appropriate application for exemption of deposit of tax as proviso of clause (b) of Section 294(4). On filing such application, the ld. CIT(A) shall consider the said application sympathetically and would decide the grounds of appeal in accordance with