“condonation of delay”

Pedne Taluka Farmers Service Co-Operative Society Limited, Pedne vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2(2), Panaji

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.198/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2014-15) Pende Taluka Farmers Service Vs I T O Ward2(2), Co-Operative Society Limited, Aaykar Bhavan, . Sahakar Bhawan, Edc, Patto, Pernem, Panjim Goa-403512. Goa-403001. Pan .No. Aaaap0651P (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Arun .F.Naik.Ar Revenue By Shri.Guru Kumar.S.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23.09.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of The Addl/Jcit (A)-12 Mumbai Passed U/Sec 143(3) & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld.Ar Submitted That There Is A Delay Of 154 Days In Filing The Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Tribunal & The Assesse Has Filed The Application & Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay. Whereas, The Facts Mentioned In The Affidavit Are Reasonable & Sufficient Cause Is Explained & The Ld. Dr Has No Specific Objections. Accordingly, Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal. The Assessee Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal

delay of 154 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed the application and affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and sufficient cause is explained and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, condone

Harshi Tripathi, Surguja vs. ITO 1, Ambikapur

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

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.524/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 Harshi Tripathi Nawapare Main Road, Surajpur, Surguja-497 229 Pan: Aonpt1286N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer-1, Ambikapur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

appellant will be obliged to your honour.” 3. Per contra, the Ld. Sr. DR did not raise any objection as regards the condonation of delay and concede that reasons for delay enshrined in the condonation petition a/w. affidavit appears to be genuine. 4 Harshi Tripathi Vs. ITO-1, Ambikapur ... have heard the submissions of the parties herein regarding the condonation of delay and carefully considered the contents of the affidavit a/w. condonation petition. I am of the considered view that there is no deliberate or malafide conduct on the part of the assessee for causing such delay. Considering

Mr. Madan Lal Gupta, Bhadrak vs. Income Tax Officer, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak

In the result, appeal of the assesee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

Bench: Shri George Mathanआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.379/Ctk/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Madan Lal Gupta Vs Ito, Bhadrak Ward, Bhadrak Near Charampa College, Tishalpur, Rahanja, Charampa, Bhadrak, 756101 Pan No. : Acxpg 7862 M (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri B.R. Panda, Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 23/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assesee Against The Order Of The Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac),Delhi Dated 18/10/2024 Passed In Appeal No.Cit(A),Cuttack/10541/2019-20 For The Assessment Year 2017-2018. 2. At The Outset, It Is Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 181 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Condonation Of Delay, Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Ld.Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To Condone The Delay. Accordingly, The Delay Of 181 Days In Filing The Appeal By The Assessee Is Condoned & The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Admitted For Hearing.

appeal of the assessee is barred by 181 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for condonation of delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Ld.Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, the delay

Ashishkumar Bhagvanjibhai Kansagra, Rajkot vs. ACIT Cir - 2(1), RKT, Rajkot

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.409/Rjt/2025 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2016-17) (Hybrid Hearing) Ashishkumar Bhagvanjibhai Vs. Acit Kansagara, Circle – 2(1), C-507, Imperial Heights, Rajkot - 360001 150 Feet Ring Road, Rajkot - 360005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Acspk6893P (Appellant) (Respondent)

been filed by the assessee belatedly. The learned Counsel adverted my attention to the affidavit filed in this regard citing reasons for condonation of delay and urged for a benign view and sought condonation of delay of 928 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel submitted ... other hand, learned DR for the revenue argued that in the absence of reasonable, satisfactory or even appropriate, explanation for seeking condonation of delay, the same is not to be condoned lightly. It is further submitted that the law of limitation may harshly affect a particular party

Umashanker Bishambharnath Sharma, Jetpur, Dist. Rajkot vs. The ITO Ward-1 (2) (3) Rajkot, Rajkot

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

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No. 303/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2010-11 Umashanker Bishambharnath Sharma Income Tax Officer, Wd – 1(2)(3), Shree Ram Enterprise, B/5, Panchvati Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Race Course Ring Society, Dhoraji Road, Road, Jetpur - 360370 Rajkot – 360001 Pan No.: Avwps1259C (अपीलाथ"/Assessee) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Brijesh Parekh, Ld.Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. Dr

appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 106 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone of delay. The contents of petition for condonation of delay, are as follows; Umashanker B. Sharma “1]1 have filed an appeal before the honourable ITAT, Rajkot ... days. The reason for the delay is as stated above.” 3. On the basis of the contents of the petition for condonation of delay, the Ld. Counsel submitted that assessee has explained the sufficient cause for condonation of delay stating that notices and order of Ld.CIT(A) were delivered

Annuva Infrastructure Private Limited, Nagpur vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward 4(4) Nagpur, Nagpur

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryannuva Infrastructure Pvt. Ito, Ward-4(4), Nagpur. Ltd., Plot No.1249, Near Sindhu Bhawan, Vs. Vaishali Nagar, Nagpur-440017. Pan: Aahca 0371 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

observed that there is a delay of 252 days in filing the instant appeal, on which, the Assessee by filing an application for condonation of delay along with duly sworn affidavit has claimed as under: - “1. The deponent/assessee has received ex-parte order U/s. 250 of the Income

Shri Gajanan Prasana Adiwasi Majoor Kamgar Sahkari Sanstha, Gondia vs. ITO Ward-1, Gondia

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, in the same terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

contrary, learned Departmental Representative (DR) refuted the claim of the Assessee. 4. Considering the reasons stated above by the Assessee for condonation of delay, as genuine, bonafide and unintentional, delay of 666 days in filing of the instant appeals, are hereby condoned, 3 ITA Nos.346-348/NAG/2025 (Shri Gajanan Prasana Adiwasi Majoor

Shri Gajanan Prasana Adiwasi Majoor Kamgar Sahkari Sanstha, Gondia vs. ITO Ward-1, Gondia

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, in the same terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

contrary, learned Departmental Representative (DR) refuted the claim of the Assessee. 4. Considering the reasons stated above by the Assessee for condonation of delay, as genuine, bonafide and unintentional, delay of 666 days in filing of the instant appeals, are hereby condoned, 3 ITA Nos.346-348/NAG/2025 (Shri Gajanan Prasana Adiwasi Majoor

Shri Gajanan Prasana Adiwasi Majoor Kamgar Sahkari Sanstha, Gondia vs. ITO Ward-1, Gondia

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes, in the same terms

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

contrary, learned Departmental Representative (DR) refuted the claim of the Assessee. 4. Considering the reasons stated above by the Assessee for condonation of delay, as genuine, bonafide and unintentional, delay of 666 days in filing of the instant appeals, are hereby condoned, 3 ITA Nos.346-348/NAG/2025 (Shri Gajanan Prasana Adiwasi Majoor

Jalsampda Karmchari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit, Wardha vs. ITO Ward 2, Wardha

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryjalsampda Karmchari Ito, Ward-2, Wardha. Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Wardha, 1, Dr. Vs. Adyalkar Bhavan, Arvi Road, Shivaji Square, Wardha-442001 Pan: Aaaaw 0478 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

that there is a delay of 279 days in filing of the instant appeal, on which the Assessee by filing an application for condonation of delay along with duly sworn affidavit dated 05/05/2025, has claimed as under:- “3 . Reason for Delay in Filing the Appeal: The president of the Appellant

Deepak Ferumal Desaraje, Amravati vs. ITO, Ward 1, Amravati

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrydeepak Ferumal Desaraje, Ito, Ward-1, Amravati Near Mithu Chakki, Rampuri Vs. Camp, Amravvati-444603. Pan: Afypd 1982 M (Appellant) (Respondent)

that there is a delay of 191 days in filing of the instant appeal, on which the Assessee by filing an application for condonation of delay along with duly sworn affidavit dated 13/03/2025 and affirming the reasons stated for condonation of delay, has claimed that he is not conversant ... merits. Ld.Commissioner by considering the reasons stated by the Assessee as insufficient cause, ultimately, dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine, without condoning the delay. 7. This Court has given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly, the Ld. Commissioner before passing the impugned

Saurabh Ashok Agrawal, Nagpur vs. DCIT/ACIT Circle-2, Nagpur

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhrysaurabh Ashok Agrawal, Dcit/Acit, Circle-2, 203, Gulmohar Apartment, Civil Nagpur. Vs. Lines, Nagpur-440 001 Pan: Agipa 1809 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Assessee has filed a sworn affidavit and mentioned the reasons for delay in filing the appeal. The reasons assigned by the Assessee for condonation of delay of 36 days, as genuine, bonafide and unintentional, delay is condoned. 3. In the instant case, during the course of assessment proceedings

Shri Pandurang Sansthan Deulgaon Mali, Mehkar vs. ITO Ward-2, Exemp, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Pandurang Sansthan Ito (Exemption), Deulgaon Mali At Post Deulgaon Ward-2, Nagpur. Vs. Mahi, Mehkar-443001 Pan: Aagts 8497 P (Appellant) (Respondent)

filing the present appeal. The Assessee has filed sworn affidavit dated 06/09/2024 and mentioned the reasons for causing delay. The reasons for condonation of delay stated by the Assessee, appears to be genuine, bonafide and unintentional, thus the delay is condoned. 3. Coming to the merits of the case ... date, however, due to bonafide and technical lapses, the said form was e-filed on 16/02/2021 and, thereafter the Assessee also sought for condonation of delay in filing Form 10B before the Ld.CIT(Exemption), Pune dated 31/05/2021, which has subsequently been rejected vide order dated 03/12/2024. The Assessee in support

Ramratan Sahebrao Pundkar, Akot vs. ITO Ward - 3, Akola

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryramratan Sahebrao Ito, Ward-3, Akola Pundkar, 1, Suman Vihar, Vs. Akola Road, Akot, Maharashtra. Pan: Abppp 9146 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

days in filing the instant appeal. The Assessee by filing a condonation application along with duly sworn affidavit dated 02/07/2024 prayed for condonation of delay. Considering the reasons assigned by the Assessee, appears to be genuine, bonafide and unintentional, hence, delay of 130 days in filing the appeal is condoned

Vishal Jain, Indore vs. ITO 4(4), Indore

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

affidavit filed by assessee is scanned and re-produced below: AYA PRADESH | serial No.....t222F cR 391194 pate..£.2. APR 20 AFFIDAVIT FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL BEFORE THE HON’BLE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AGAINST THE APPEAL ORDER PASSED BY HON’BLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME

Harish Chandra Gavli, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer, Jhabua

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi**

days in filing first-appeal before CIT(A). Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported by an affidavit on stamp. Referring to same, Ld. AR submitted that the email id registered in department record and also fetched in Form

Arp Securities Limited, Indore vs. Income Tax Officer- 1(1), Indore

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, इंदौर न्यायपीठ, इंदौर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL INDORE BENCH, INDORE BEFORE SHRI B.M. BIYANI, ACCOUNTANT