← 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

M G Metalloy Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 3693/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Amit Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT (DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 153DSection 68

grounds and consequently declined any relief. 5. Aggrieved by the denial of relief by the CIT(A), the assessee preferred appeal before the Tribunal. 6. Before the Tribunal, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee Mr. Amit Goel vociferously assailed the order of the CIT(A) on multiple grounds

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Varun Beverages Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 404/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Jain, C.A. &For Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271A

assessment order, ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had deleted the additions. Against the said order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. While deciding the said appeal, being ITA No. 5258/Del/2015, the Tribunal in order dated 26.02.2020 has held that additional income declared by Assessee is connected

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. R.J. Corp Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 403/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Rajat Jain, C.A. &For Respondent: Sh. P. Praveen Sidharth, CIT/DR
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 14ASection 153ASection 271A

assessment order, ld. Commissioner (Appeals) had deleted the additions. Against the said order of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), Revenue preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. While deciding the said appeal, being ITA No. 5258/Del/2015, the Tribunal in order dated 26.02.2020 has held that additional income declared by Assessee is connected

Harivadanbhai Maganlal Patel, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 1(3)(7), Surat

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

ITA 30/SRT/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat08 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), DR. A. L. SAINI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr- DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 50C

filing the said appeal for 15days. The ld Counsel explained the reasons of such delay stating that assessee could not file his appeal before the Tribunal as the physical copy of the impugned order was not received by assessee on time, and in this process 15 days delay has occurred

Hasini Infra Constructions and Developers, Kakinada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 9/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated,30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is erred in facts and law while passing ... Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated, 30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. 15. The Revenue has raised the following grounds for the AY: 2018-19 as follows: “1. The order

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry vs. Hasini Infra Consrtuctions& Developers, Kakinada

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 25/VIZ/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated,30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is erred in facts and law while passing ... Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated, 30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. 15. The Revenue has raised the following grounds for the AY: 2018-19 as follows: “1. The order

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry vs. Hasini Infra Consrtuctions& Developers, Kakinada

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 24/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated,30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is erred in facts and law while passing ... Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated, 30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. 15. The Revenue has raised the following grounds for the AY: 2018-19 as follows: “1. The order

Hasini Infra Constructions and Developers, Kakinada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 11/VIZ/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated,30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is erred in facts and law while passing ... Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated, 30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. 15. The Revenue has raised the following grounds for the AY: 2018-19 as follows: “1. The order

Hasini Infra Constructions and Developers, Kakinada vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, both the Revenue’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 10/VIZ/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos.9, 10 & 11/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Hasini Infra Constructions & Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Developers, Income Tax, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Central Circle-1, Kakinada. Rajahmundry. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. Nos. 24 & 25/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2018-19 & 2019-20) The Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. Hasini Infra Constructions Income Tax & Developers, Central Circle-1, D.No.2-27-23, Gokul Street, Rajahmundry. Kakinada. Pan: Aaifh 0895 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri M.V. Prasad, Ar ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri Mn Murthy Naik, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Prasad, ARFor Respondent: Sri MN Murthy Naik, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 153A

Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated,30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) is erred in facts and law while passing ... Viajayawada in ITA Nos. 83 to 88/Viz/2022, dated, 30/08/2022. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the Revenue filed the instant appeal before the Tribunal. 15. The Revenue has raised the following grounds for the AY: 2018-19 as follows: “1. The order

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (International Taxation)., Visakhapatnam vs. Varun Ogili, Nellore

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

ITA 137/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.137/Viz/2021("नधा"रणवष"/Asst. Year:2017-18) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Sri Varun Ogili, Tax (International Taxation), Nellore. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aakpo 5012 C C.O. No. 4/Viz/2022 (Inआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.137/Viz/2021) ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year :2017-18) Sri Varun Ogili, Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Nellore. Income Tax (International Pan: Aakpo 5012 C Taxation), Visakhapatnam. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Sunil Vamsi Krishna Kota ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 14/03/2023 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of : 04/05/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri Sunil Vamsi Krishna KotaFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

assessee. 2. At the outset, we noticed from the appeal record there is a delay of 80 days in filing the Revenue’s appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. DR brought our attention to the affidavit filed for condonation of delay ... view this is a fit case to condone the delay and accordingly, we hereby condone the delay of 80 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 4. Brief facts of case are that the assessee filed the return of income

Late Sh. Vijay Kumar Johari (Through L/H Smt. Hema Johari, Sh. Vaibhav Johari & Sh. Varun Johari), 63, Om Nivas, Masjid Wali Gali, 22 Godam, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-2, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 241/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, C.AFor Respondent: Ms Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)
Section 115BSection 133ASection 143(1)Section 69

ITAT, Indore Bench in case of Shri Rajesh Kumar Bajaj Vs. ACIT in ITA No.16/Ind/2019 dated 09.03.2020. 3. Now the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 4 Late Shri Vijay Kumar Johari, Jaipur. 4. Before us, the ld. A/R of the assessee submitted the written submission as under

Nijhawan Travel Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 18(2), New Delhi

ITA 5064/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Delhi03 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.K.Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmanijhawan Travel Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Services Pvt. Ltd. Circle 18(2) F 53, Bhagat Singh New Delhi 110002 Market, New Delhi 110001 Pan : Aaacn0150D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 72

loss from Chit Fund Rs. 3,14,000/- and the Ld. CIT(A) had sustained the same. Therefore, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising following grounds qua these additions : “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income

Rajasthan Hindi Granth Academy, Jaipur vs. ITO(Exemption), Ward 2

ITA 60/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: The Date Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Sh. S. L. Gupta (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 10Section 127Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

appeal is therefore rejected.” 5. As the assessee not satisfied with the finding of the ld. CIT(A), assessee filed the present appeal before the tribunal. Apropos to the grounds so raised by the assessee the ld. AR appearing on behalf of the 9 Rajasthan Hindi Granth Academy

Natthi Singh, Vill Visatipura vs. ITO, Ward-4, Bharatpur

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

ITA 117/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 May 2023AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Smt. Madhvi Joshi , ProxyFor Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 144Section 250

revenue submitted that the assessment order was ex-party, the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) was also delayed and again this appeal before the tribunal is delayed. Therefore, the assessee cannot by pass the lower authority and seek justice directly from 4 Natthi Singh vs. ITO the higher courts

Expeditors International of Washington, Usa vs. ACIT, Circle 1(2)(2), International Taxation, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 355/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Khare, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vizay Vasanta, CIT- DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 270ASection 9(1)(vi)Section 9(1)(vii)

Accordingly, the Ld. AO in his final assessment order dated 21.02.2023 confirmed the impugned additions. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal and ground Nos. 2, 3 and 4 relate thereto. 5. At the outset of the hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the issues raised

Mass Awash Private Limited, Lucknow vs. Addi. CIT International Taxation, Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 166/DEL/2021[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 156Section 195Section 201(1)Section 271C(1)(a)Section 275(1)(C)Section 275(1)(c)

Rs.9,92,385/- for A.Y. 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 respectively is confirmed.” 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 6. The registry noticed that all the three captioned ... facts and circumstances of the assessee’s case, we decline to condone the inordinate delay of 1005 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal. 14. In para 7 above, we have enumerated the dates fixed for hearing of the appeals. Despite numerous opportunities provided to the assessee, the assessee chose

Mass Awash Private Limited, Lucknow vs. Addi. CIT International Taxation, Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 165/DEL/2021[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 156Section 195Section 201(1)Section 271C(1)(a)Section 275(1)(C)Section 275(1)(c)

Rs.9,92,385/- for A.Y. 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 respectively is confirmed.” 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 6. The registry noticed that all the three captioned ... facts and circumstances of the assessee’s case, we decline to condone the inordinate delay of 1005 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal. 14. In para 7 above, we have enumerated the dates fixed for hearing of the appeals. Despite numerous opportunities provided to the assessee, the assessee chose

Mass Awash Private Limited, Lucknow vs. Addi. CIT International Taxation, Noida

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 164/DEL/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 May 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 156Section 195Section 201(1)Section 271C(1)(a)Section 275(1)(C)Section 275(1)(c)

Rs.9,92,385/- for A.Y. 2004-05, 2005-06 and 2006-07 respectively is confirmed.” 5. Dissatisfied, the assessee came in appeal before the Tribunal challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and all the grounds of appeal relate thereto. 6. The registry noticed that all the three captioned ... facts and circumstances of the assessee’s case, we decline to condone the inordinate delay of 1005 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal. 14. In para 7 above, we have enumerated the dates fixed for hearing of the appeals. Despite numerous opportunities provided to the assessee, the assessee chose

Gani Mohammad Popat, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-3, Vapi

In the result, grounds No

ITA 514/SRT/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Surat02 May 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Popat Yasin Abdulganibhai, I.T.O., Son & L/H Of Late Gani Mohammad Ward-3, Vs. Popat, Vapi. Bombay Market, Zanda Chowk, Near S.T. Bus Depot, Vapi. Pan No. Akvpp 0747 J Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)

medical problem, the assessee was unable to forward the order of ld. CIT(A) to his consultant to enable him to file appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee was also having mental problem. Due to old age, the assessee forget about the receipt of order due to old age related ... documents. Ongoing through such document and order of appeal, they realized to send those papers to his consultant and on their advice, filed appeal before the Tribunal. It is further stated that failure to file appeal is not intentional but beyond the control of assessee. The assessee prayed for condoning

M/S. Viraj Profiles Pvt. Ltd (Formerly Known As Viraj Profiles Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Cir 3(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 691/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale (Jm)

Section 131Section 133ASection 153A

appellate proceedings, the Ld CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee in part. Hence the assessee has filed this appeal before the Tribunal challenging the order passed by Ld CIT(A). 4.0 Following issues are urged in this appeal by the assessee:- 2 Viraj Profiles Limited (a) Partial confirmation