“condonation of delay”

Awaaz Foundation, Mumbai vs. ACIT Trust Circle/CPC, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 1924/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Acit, Trust Circle/Cpc, Awaaz Foundation, Mtnl Building, Peddar C/O- Sumaira Abdulali, 3, बिधम/ Road, Mumbai-400 026 Reshma Apartment, 13 Pali Vs. Hill Road, Near Petit School, Bandra (W) Mumbai-400 050 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabta8994Q (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. R. Agarwal, Ld. Ar प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Manoj Sinha, Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 03.10.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Impugned Order Dated 26.07.2022, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Relation To Intimation U/S 143(1) For Ay 2020-21. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

referred to the CBDT circular No. 2 of 2020 dated 30.01.2020 wherein it has been stated that, the authority to condone the delay vests with Ld. CIT(Exemp.). The relevant circular as well as the order of Ld. CIT(A) reads as under:- Under the provision of section ... Foundation circular/Instruction issued in this regard, and with a view to expedite the disposal of applications filed by such trust or institution for condoning the delay in filing Form No. 10B and in the exercise of the powers conferred under section 119(2) of the Act, the Central Board

Dnyanshwar Nivruti Talpade, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax PCIT, Thane

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

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Rahul Chaudharydhyaneshwar Nivrutti Vs. Principal Commissioner Talapade, Plot No. 207, Of Income Tax, 6 Th Floor, Nirmal Nagar At Post Ashar I.T. Park, Road Asangaon, Shahpur, Number 162 Nehru Nagar Shahpur Maharashtra - Wagle Ind. Estate, 421601 Thane (W) 400604 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Ackpt2532N Appellant .. Respondent

apply the said provisions.” 2. There was a delay in filing this appeal by 430 days and assessee has filed condonation of delay vide letter dated 31.05.2022 and affidavit dated 11.11.2022. The assessee has stated that the case of the assessee submitted that in the case of the assessee scrutiny ... circumstances we observe that there is bonafide reason for delay in filing the appeal. Therefore to adjudicate the case on merit we condone the delay in filing this appeal. 4. The fact of the case is that assessment u/s 143(3) was completed on 27.12.2017. Thereafter on verification

Venkatesh Securities Ltd., Mumbai vs. The Income Tax Officer-3(3)(4), Mumbai

Appeal is dismissed

hereinafter referred to as „the Act‟). ITA. No. 7181/Mum/2018 Assessment Year: 2009-10 2. The Appeal was accompanied by application dated 12.12.2018 seeking condonation of delay of 738 days in filing the present appeal. The relevant extract of the application read as under: “2. That the appeal filed ... days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal which may kindly be condoned” 3. The first affidavit supporting the application for condonation of delay, sworn on 18.04.2022, was filed by the Appellant. Thereafter, second affidavit sworn on 10.08.2022 was filed by the Appellant giving the following explanation or reasons

Ramesh J. Thakkar, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 26(3)(6), Mumbai

In the result Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Jm आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No. 823/Mum/2022 (निर्धारणवर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) Income Tax Officer Ramesh J. Thakkar 26(3)(6) Mumbai 51, Moti Sagar,3Rd Road बिधम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Floor, Ganesh Gawde Road, Vs. Road, Church Gate, Mulund(W), Mumbai- Mumbai-400020 400080 स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./ Pan No. Aabpt4367L (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : अपीलाथीकीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri. Mehul Shah प्रत्यथीकीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. Neeta Jeph सुनवाईकीतारीख/ : 01.09.2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणाकीतारीख / : 30.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Amit Shukla: The Aforesaid Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 17.03.2021, Passed By National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi For The Quantum Of Assessment Passed U/S 147/143(3), For The Ay 2012-13. 2

allowed all the appeals which were required to be filed during the period 15.03.2020-28.02.2022 to be excluded while considering the condonation of delay. Accordingly, the Appeal of the Assessee in filing of the Appeal is condom as it falls within the same period. 4. Before us, the Ld. Counsel

Indoco Remidies Limited, Mumbai vs. NFAC, Delhi

Appeal is allowed

present appeal came to be filed by the Appellant against the said order passed by the CIT(A) along with application for condonation of delay of 130 days in the instituting of the appeal. 3. When the matter was taken up for hearing the Learned Authorised Representative for Appellant pointed ... above facts and requested for condonation of delay in filing appeal. He further submitted that since none of the grounds raised in appeal have been adjudicated, all the issues be restored to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh. In response to query from the Bench, the Learned Departmental

Mittal Park Co-Op Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (A), Delhi

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

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalmittal Park Co-Opp. Housing Society Ltd. 44, Mittal Park, Janardhan Mhatra Marg, Ruiapark, Juhu-Mumbai-400049. Pan: Aaaam2918E ...... Appellant Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (National Faceless Appeal Centre), Delhi. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Manoj Mahimkar Respondent By : Sh. Dilip K. Shah, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/11/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (For Short ‘Nfac’), Delhi Dated 06.04.2022 Under Section 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Honourable Commissioner Of Income Tax- (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi, [Hon. Cit- (A)] Has Erred On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law Declining To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal.

NFAC, Delhi, [Hon. CIT- (A)] has erred on the fact and in the circumstances of the case and in the law declining to condone the delay in filing the appeal. 2 ITA No. 1029/Mum/2022-Mittal Park Co-opp. Housing Society Ltd. 2. Hon. CIT-(A) has erred on the fact ... have gone through the order of Ld. CIT(A) and the submissions of assessee along with affidavit before the Ld. CIT(A) for condonation of delay. 4. As per our observation following facts emerged out of the submissions of assessee and the order of the Ld. CIT(A) as under

Xprize Foundation, Mumbai vs. Additional /Joint/Deputy/ACIT/Income Tax Officer, National E-Assessment Centre, Mumbai

In the result, the present appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

erred in not applying law of natural justice by not considering the application of condonation of delay despite CBDT granting the power to CIT for the condoation of delay for filing form 10. 4. CIT(A) has erred in rejecting the contention of your appellant of pending application of condonation ... Appellant. On perusal of records we noted that Form 10 was filled by the Appellant belatedly on 06.01.2021. An application seeking condonation of delay in filing Form 10 was also filed before Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) on 21.01.2021 by relying upon the Circular No. 6 of 2020 issued

Mr. Darshan Navalmal Shah, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) 30, Mumbai

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

time barred by 102 days. Before us, Ld. Counsel has filed affidavit of the Assessee wherein he has made following averments for condonation of delay, which are as under:- Mr. Darshan N. Shah, son of Mr. Novamal Shah Caged 39 years, having officer at 20/14 Joshi Bhavan, 2nd Floor ... received the order of the Ld.CIT(A), as stated in para 7 of the affidavit. Looking to the aforesaid facts & circumstances I am condoning the delay and admit the same in the interest of substantial justice. 6 I.T.A. No. 1814/Mum/2022 Mr. Darshan Navalmal Shah 5. The briefs facts are that

Sudarshan Roshanlal Kharbanda, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-14(1)(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

contention, the assessee has also filed a medical certificate. Sudarshan Roshanlal Kharbanda ITA No.1677/Mum./2022 Accordingly, the assessee has prayed for condonation of delay in filing this appeal. 5. During the hearing, the learned D.R. did not raise serious objections against the prayer for condonation of delay. In view ... considered view that there was a sufficient cause that prevented the assessee from filing this appeal within the limitation period. Accordingly, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 6. The brief facts of the case as emanating from the record