“Section 253(1)(c)”

Section References (mined)Section 253Section 253(1)(c)16 judgments

PURVANCHAL CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,GUWAHATI, ASSAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3) (EXEMP), WARD-2(3) (EXEMP), GUWAHATI, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 125/GTY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati25 Aug 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 12ASection 154Section 80GSection 80G(5)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI BENCH, GUWAHATI (VIRTUAL HEARING AT KOLKATA) SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY

SAQUIB AHMED,PIPARIYA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 402/IND/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263

section 253 of the Act an appeal against the\n"Impugned Order" u/s 263 of the Act lies before this Tribunal.\n[section 253(1)(c)]. By virtue of section 253(3) of the Act every\nappeal under subsection (1) shall be filed within sixty days of\nthe date

KUDOS FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, MUMBAI

ITA 3075/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Abhilash HiranFor Respondent: Shri Biswanath Das

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 253(1)(c)Section 263Section 36(1)

case Kudos Finance and Investments Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellant') respectfully craves leave to prefer an appeal under section 253(1)(c) of the Act against the order dated 30 March 2024 passed by the Principal Commissioner of income-Tax, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned

JAI SHIVRAI PRATISHTHAN,PUNE vs. CIT-EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 443/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No. 0442 & 0443/Pun/2024 Jai Shivrai Pratishthan Lane-11, Paramhansa Nagar, Paud Rd., Kothrud, Pune-411038 Pan:Aabtj1568P . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: None for the Assessee [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 253(1)(c)Section 80G(5)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

JAI SHIVRAI PRATISHTHAN ,PUNE vs. CIT- EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

ITA 442/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Jun 2024

For Appellant: None for the Assessee [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 253(1)(c)Section 80G(5)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

SH. BALJIT SINGH,LUDHIANA vs. PR. CIT, LUDHIANA -1, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 416/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajiv Kaushal &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263(1)Section 68Section 92C

order under section 263 wherein the aforesaid ground is considered / taken cognizance still survives for us. The tribunal by virtue of section 253(1)(c)(ii) in appeal has jurisdiction to determine its legality, validity and proprietary in a manner challenged before us, even after consequential order is passed; even

THE ROHA EDUCATIONAL OF THE WELFARE ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI vs. CIT, EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES

ITA 466/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Tanzil Padvekar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 253(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

SADQUAH MEDICAL AND CHARITABLE JAMATUL MUSLIMEEN SOCIETY,MUMBAI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE , PUNE

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES

ITA 464/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Tanzil Padvekar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 253(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

SHREE SALASAR HANUMAN TRUST,SANGLI vs. COMMISSIONER O INCOME TAX EXEMPTION, PUNE, PUNE

Appeals are ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES

ITA 425/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 May 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Tanzil Padvekar [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ajaykumar Kesari [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 2(15)Section 253(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘B’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

AHUJA ANIMAL CARE FOUNATION,THANE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

The appeal is ALLOWED FOR STATISTCIAL PURPOSES

ITA 54/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune22 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Partha Sarathi Choudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 54/Pun/2024

For Appellant: Mr Bhuvanesh Kankani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 253(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE “A” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PARTHA SARATHI CHOUDHURY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND

ASHWINI SAHAKARI RUNGNALAYA & RESEARCH CENTER,,SOLAPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, (EXEMPTIONS),, PUNE

ITA 714/PUN/2018[N.A]Status: DisposedITAT Pune07 Mar 2024

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 714/Pun/2018 Ashwini Sahakari Rugnalaya & Research Centre 7107/1, Plot No. 180, North Sadar Bazar, Solapur-413003. Pan: Aaaja0041K . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Shingte [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Keyur Patel [‘Ld. DR’]

Section 10Section 10(23)Section 11Section 12ASection 22Section 253(1)(c)

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PUNE ‘A’ BENCH, PUNE BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER

VISHNU PAREEK,JAIPUR vs. CIT(A), JAIPUR

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

ITA 292/JPR/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Apr 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Mahendra Gargieya (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt Chanchal Meena (Addl. CIT)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

Assessee—Chartered Accountant engaged in matter was unaware of fact that appeal could be filed against order of CIT, post amendment made in Section 253(1)(c)—Name of Chartered Accountant was mentioned in petition—Counsel could not have conjured up name of Chartered Accountant—Not only period of delay

RAJESHWARA RAO PERI,VISHAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT(A)-TDS(2), DELHI

The appeal is dismissed

ITA 185/DEL/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmash. Rajeshwera Rao Peri Vs. Cit (Tds)-2, Flat No. 303, Vayuputra Heights New Delhi & Anr, Chandrampalem, Durganagar Madhurawada, Vishakhapatnam- 530041 Pan : Acupp7109B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 192Section 201(1)Section 263Section 89

which was disposed of as non-maintainable. An appeal against order u/s 263 is maintainable before the Tribunal by virtue of Section 253(1)(c) of the Act. As observed this appeal is maintainable by an ‘assessee’, however, the aforesaid discussion establish that appellant is neither ‘assessee’ nor ‘assessee

ESSEL MINING & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CENTRAL-1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3202/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Nov 2022AY 2009-10

Section 127(2)Section 132Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 153CSection 263

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘E‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER

GOLDIAM JEWELLERY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE PR. CIT (CENTRAL)-1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 729/MUM/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT–DR

Section 10ASection 142Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 253(1)(c)Section 263Section 263(1)

Commissioner of Income-tax (Central)-1, Mumbai (the PCIT) under section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act), in accordance with section 253(1)(c) of the said Act, on the following amongst other grounds each of which is in the alternative and without prejudice to any others

GOLDIAM JEWELLERY LTD.,MUMBAI vs. PR. CIT (CENTRAL)-1, MUMBAI

In the result, appeals by the assessee are allowed

ITA 728/MUM/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Shekhar L. Gajbhiye, CIT–DR

Section 10ASection 142Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 253(1)(c)Section 263Section 263(1)