← All Phrases

“appeal before the tribunal”

AppealsSection 253Section 25316,033 judgments

The decision most relied on for appeal before the tribunal is CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd. (38 ITD 320), cited in 2,267 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on appeal before the tribunal

CIT v. Multiplan India Ltd.
38 ITD 320 · 1991 · ITAT
2,267
citing judgments

An appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can be dismissed for non-prosecution or treated as unadmitted when the appellant fails to appear, cooperate, or show diligence, in accordance with Rule 19(2) of the Income-tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules. The law aids the vigilant, not those who sleep on their rights.

Estate of Late Tukojirao Holkar v. CWT
223 ITR 480 · 1997 · High Court
2,040
citing judgments

A court or tribunal is not bound to answer a reference or adjudicate an appeal on its merits if the party at whose instance the proceeding is made fails to appear at the hearing or take necessary steps for its proper conduct.

CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders
349 ITR 336 · 2012 · High Court
956
citing judgments

Appellate authorities can entertain fresh claims or revised computations of income made by an assessee, even if these were not submitted through a revised return of income.

National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT
389 ITR 326 · 2016 · High Court
241
citing judgments

An appellate authority can admit and adjudicate additional grounds of appeal if they are legal in nature or go to the root of the matter, even if not raised before lower authorities or filed belatedly.

Commissioner of Income Tax Madras v. Chenniyappa Mudiliar
1 SCC 591 · 1985 · Reported
225
citing judgments

The appellate tribunal must render a proper decision on both facts and law, disposing of an appeal on its merits rather than dismissing it solely due to the appellant's absence. This obligation is derived from Section 33(4) of the Income Tax Act, 1922, and reflects principles of natural justice.

Otters Club v. DIT
392 ITR 244 · 2017 · High Court
202
citing judgments

The Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days.

CIT v. Bharat General Reinsurance Co Ltd.
81 ITR 303 · 1971 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Income received by an assessee for services rendered to an Indian company may not be taxable, particularly when the Revenue does not contest its non-taxability. This principle aligns with CBDT Circular No. 14 of 1955, which has been approved by the Supreme Court.

Shivsagar Veg Restaurant v. ACIT
317 ITR 433 · 2009 · High Court
202
citing judgments

Orders that are inordinately delayed are liable to be recalled and heard afresh, and the Appellate Tribunal President should frame guidelines for timely disposal of appeals.

Judgments citing appeal before the tribunal

Bimbisar Nagar Nisar Co Op Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 41(4)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5558/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Shri Tanmay PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Pravin Salunkhe
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246ASection 250Section 80Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

aforesaid Rectification Order was dismissed by the CIT(A), vide order dated 06/09/2024. As a result, the Assessee has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds reproduced in paragraph 4 above. 6. We have heard both the sides and have perused the material on record

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Sps Finquest Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4367/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: CIT(A) challenging the above addition/disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) allowed the appeal preferred by the Assessee and deleted the disallowance of INR.5,48,313/- made under Section 14A of the Act as well as the addition of INR.10,00,00,000/- made under Section 68 of the Act.

For Appellant: Shri Devendra JainFor Respondent: Shri Kishor Dhule
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

addition of INR.10,00,00,000/- made under Section 68 of the Act. 5. Being aggrieved, the Revenue has preferred the present appeal before the Tribunal on the grounds reproduced at paragraph 2 above. 6. We have heard both the sides and have perused the material on record. 7. There

Asia Investment Corporation (Mauritius) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Taxation)1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands partly allowed

ITA 2766/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)(b)Section 69Section 74

impugned orders by making additions in the hands of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that facts leading to the issue alleged by the assessee before this Tribunal are identical for both

Asia Investment Corporation (Mauritius ) Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (Int Tax)-1(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee for both the years under consideration stands partly allowed

ITA 2765/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(1)(b)Section 69Section 74

impugned orders by making additions in the hands of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld.AO, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4. At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that facts leading to the issue alleged by the assessee before this Tribunal are identical for both

Sri Baidyanath Memorial Trust, Bhubaneswar vs. ITO, Exemption Circle, Bhubaneswar

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

ITA 501/CTK/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Jan 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2016-17 Sri Sri Baidyanarth Baidyanarth Memorial Memorial Vs. Income Income Tax Tax Officer, Officer, Trust, Plot No.338, Sahid Trust, Plot No.338, Sahid Exemption Exemption Circle, Circle, Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Nagar, Bhubaneswar. Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No. No.Aahts 6816 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Bibekananda Mohanty, Ca Bibekananda Mohanty, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/01/20 025

For Appellant: Shri Bibekananda Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 143(3)

could not bring to the notice of the Chief Functionary. Therefore, there was delay of 253 in filing of appeal before the Tribunal. The reasons stated in the petition have not been found to be false and, therefore, we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing

Sanjay Kumar Shukla, Sandila vs. Income Tax Officer, Siwan

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

ITA 362/PAT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250

dated 06.09.2016. I.T.A. No.: 362/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Sanjay Kumar Shukla. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That Ld.AO failed to issue show-cause notice before making huge addition into the income of appellant and further, he wrapped

Faridi Foundation, Arrah vs. CIT (Exemption), Patna

ITA 223/PAT/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishraι.Τ.Α. No.: 223/Pat/2023

Section 115BSection 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act") for AY 2023-24 dated 26.05.2023. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. That the Ld. CIT(Exemptions) has erred in law and on facts by not following the procedure ... also cancelled. 4. Aggrieved with the order of rejection of the application for registration, the assessee has filed the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Rival contentions were heard and the submissions made have been examined. Ground nos. 1 & 2 relate to the necessary evidence to be filed before

Geeta Krushna Mahila Urban Credit Co Op Soc Limited Nagpur, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 4(4), Nagpur

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee IS allowed for statistical purposes, subject to the condition as stated in Para–6 above

ITA 246/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Suren DuragkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe

delay in filing the appeal before us as mentioned in the Affidavit. Therefore, the delay of 99 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal is hereby condoned. 3. It is worth mentioning here that the assessee nether before the Assessing Officer nor before the learned CIT(A) appeared

Kashish Goyal, Chandigarh vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 603/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Appeal Is Finally Heard Or Disposed Off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 115BSection 132Section 139Section 153ASection 69Section 69C

provisions of section 69C r.w. section 115BBE of the Act. 5. Against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) the assessee preferred in appeal before the Tribunal. 6. During the course of hearing, it was vehemently argued by the assessee's counsel that the assessee had filed his return

The Ambala Board of Education, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Chandigarh

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

ITA 780/CHANDI/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 780/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2023-24 The Ambala Board Of The Ito, Education, बनाम Chandigarh Plot No.151, Industrial Vs. Area, Phase Ii, Chandigarh 160002 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabat0668H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Hybrid Hearing ) "नधा""रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 30.09.2024 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Chandigarh [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’], For The Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Was A Delay Of 17 Days In Filing Of The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Filed A Letter Dated 23.7.2024 For 780-Chd-2024 The Ambala Board Of Education, Chandigarh

For Appellant: Sh. Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR

Assessment Year 2023-24. 2. The Registry has pointed out that there was a delay of 17 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the Assessee has filed a letter dated 23.7.2024 for 780-Chd-2024 The Ambala Board of Education, Chandigarh 2 condonation

Nikhil Bector, Ludhiana vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as

ITA 404/CHANDI/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 254(2)

Hearing : 29.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 HYBRID HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 23.02.2024 passed for assessment year

Shri Mahaveer Education and Charitable Trust, Haryana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1, Panchkula

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as

ITA 268/CHANDI/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Kumar Arora, CIT(A)For Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 80G

Hearing : 29.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 VIRTUAL HEARING O R D E R PER RAJ PAL YADAV, VP The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) Chandigarh [in short ‘the CIT (E)’] dated 24.01.2024. 2. The ld. Counsel

Punjab National Bank, Dal Lake Dharamshala Cantt vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) TDS, Panchkula

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 415/CHANDI/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 415/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Punjab National Bank, The Jcit बनाम Dal Lake Dharmshala (Osd)Tds, Cantt. Sector 2, Vs. Tehsil Dharmshala 176216 Panchkula "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ptlpi2710F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा""रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None (Withdrawal Application) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 22.02.2023 Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Was A Delay Of 66 Days In Filing Of The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Filed A Letter Giving Detailed

For Appellant: None (Withdrawal application)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 254(2)

Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Registry has pointed out that there was a delay of 66 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. Counsel for the Assessee has filed a letter giving detailed 415-Chd-2023 Punajb National Bank, Dharmshala 2 reasoning along with affidavit

Punjab National Bank, Dal Lake Dharamshala Cantt vs. Dy. Commisisoner of Income Tax (TDS), Panchkula

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 414/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 414/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Punjab National Bank, The Dcit (Tds), Dal Lake Dharmshala बनाम Sector 2, Cantt. Panchkula Vs. Tehsil Dharmshala, Distt. Kangra 176216 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ptlpi2710F अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा""रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : None (Withdrawal Application) राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 29.01.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 आदेश/Order Per Krinwant Sahay, Am : Appeal In This Case Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2023 Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That There Is A Delay Of 40 Days In Filing Of The Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Ld.

For Appellant: None (Withdrawal application)For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 254(2)

Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 40 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. 414-Chd-2023 Punjab National Bank, Dharmshala 2 Counsel for the Assessee has filed a letter dated 23.7.2024 for condonation of delay

The Ayali Kalan Co-Op Agriculture Multi, Ludhiana vs. Income Tac Officer, Ludhiana

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 259/CHANDI/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Jan 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav

For Appellant: Shri Parveen Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)Section 80Section 80P(2)

Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 28.01.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 30.01.2025 VIRTUAL HEARING O R D E R The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) dated 29.01.2016 passed for assessment year 2017-18. It is pertinent to note that this appeal

Infinite Happiness Spiritual Foundation, Ahmedabad vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1859/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2025

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1858 & 1859/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : Na) बनाम/ Infinite Happiness Commissioner Of Income Spiritual Foundation Tax (Exemption) Vs. F/F/4, Navnidhi Complex, Ahmedabad Opp. Stadium Circle, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagci4942 (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Ms. Urjita Shah, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V Nandakumar, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/01/2025 30/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, (In Short ‘The Cit(E)’) Both Dated 15.03.2023 In The Matter Of Rejection Of Registration Under Section 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) & Rejection Of Approval U/S.80G(5) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms. Urjita Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

said Chartered Accountant left for his native place and neither contacted the Chartered Accountant nor filed the appeal before the Tribunal. On mere enquiry with his personal friends, the Accountant was of the opinion that no appeal was required to be filed in the matter. As the Accountant had left

Infinite Happiness Spiritual Foundation, Ahmedabad vs. The CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1858/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jan 2025

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1858 & 1859/Ahd/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : Na) बनाम/ Infinite Happiness Commissioner Of Income Spiritual Foundation Tax (Exemption) Vs. F/F/4, Navnidhi Complex, Ahmedabad Opp. Stadium Circle, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad, Gujarat - 380009 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagci4942 (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Ms. Urjita Shah, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri V Nandakumar, Cit. Dr Date Of Hearing 27/01/2025 30/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Ahmedabad, (In Short ‘The Cit(E)’) Both Dated 15.03.2023 In The Matter Of Rejection Of Registration Under Section 12A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) & Rejection Of Approval U/S.80G(5) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms. Urjita Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri V Nandakumar, CIT. DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

said Chartered Accountant left for his native place and neither contacted the Chartered Accountant nor filed the appeal before the Tribunal. On mere enquiry with his personal friends, the Accountant was of the opinion that no appeal was required to be filed in the matter. As the Accountant had left

Pimprad Vividh Karyakari Sahakari Seva Society, Satara vs. ACIT Circle Satara, Satara

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

ITA 19/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 69ASection 80P(2)(a)

NFAC, Delhi relating to assessment year 2021-22. 2 SA No.1/PUN/2025 2. There is a delay of 271 days in filing of this appeal before the Tribunal, for which the assessee has filed a condonation application along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. After considering the contents ... various other decisions. 5. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC. 6. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that both the orders of lower authorities

Noble Construction Company, Pune vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(1), Pune

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

ITA 481/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 145ASection 44A

gross receipts is also upheld. The grounds of appeals raised by the appellant are DISMISSED.” 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 6. The Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the action

Poona District Education Association, Pune vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

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

ITA 2230/PUN/2024[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(1)(ac)

cancelled the regular registration granted on 28.05.2021 u/s 12AB r.w.s. 12A(1)(ac)(i) of the Act. 4. Dissatisfied, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The Ld. AR submitted that all the requisite details/documents were duly filed by the assessee before the lower authorities and the same