BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

72 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 124clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai131Chennai127Karnataka122Delhi106Bangalore94Ahmedabad72Kolkata61Hyderabad48Calcutta42Pune33Chandigarh27Raipur26Rajkot25Jaipur23Lucknow15Ranchi14Cuttack14Indore12Surat11Visakhapatnam10Nagpur7Guwahati6SC6Jodhpur3Telangana3Amritsar3Varanasi3Jabalpur2Patna2Agra1Orissa1Punjab & Haryana1Cochin1Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 13244Addition to Income20Section 143(3)14Section 143(2)11Section 14411Section 26311Section 4011Deduction10Section 147

TEJAS KARSHANBHAI DARI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1459/AHD/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Apr 2022AY 2011-12
For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 144Section 147

section 154 was served upon him at the old address. That communication had also consumed time. Therefore, the assessee could not gain anything by filing the appeal late. There was no mala fide imputable to the assessee. The delay in filing the appeal was the result of ill health coupled with the change of his address thrice in a short

SHRI PRAVINKUMAR HIRALAL VORA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 153/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 72 · Page 1 of 4

9
Section 271(1)(c)9
Penalty9
Disallowance8
ITAT Ahmedabad
16 Sept 2022
AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.153/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Pravinkumar Hiralal Vora, D.C.I.T., A-71, Trithbhumi Apartment, Vs. Circle-2, Nr. Thakorbhai Desai Hall, Ahmedabad. Law Garden, Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Abjpv2934B

For Appellant: Shri P.D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 119Section 143(2)Section 254

condone the delay of 1442 days in filing the appeal and proceed to hear the appeal on merit for the adjudication. 10. The assessee in the 1st and additional ground of appeal has challenged the validity of the assessment framed under section 143(3) of the Act. Asstt. Year 2012-13 7 11. The facts in brief in the present

AMISH UMESH JANI,THANE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(2)(5), AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

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

ITA 864/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271

Section 147 of the 1961 Act. 3. Aggrieved , the assessee filed first appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee in statement of facts as well as grounds of appeal filed before ld. CIT(A) , stated as under:- “A. Statement of Facts 1.The Appellant is Individual and shifted to Mumbai after the death of her husband. 2. The assessee

THE VISNAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD (UNDER LIQUIDATION),MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-GANDHINAGAR (PREVIOUSLY DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE, PATAN), GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1414/AHD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.738, 1414 & 1415/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) The Visnagar Nagarik Sahakari The Assistant Commissioner Bank Ltd.,(Under Liquidation) बनाम Of Income Tax, / Market Yard, Circle Gandhinagar. V/S. Visnagar, (Previously Dcit, Mehsana-384315, Patan Circle, Patan) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaft8764C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A P Nanavaty, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], All Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Arising From The Assessments Framed By The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle, Patan [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Assessing Officer Or Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri A P Nanavaty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(4)

delay in filing appeal before NFAC may be condoned. 4. Ld. NFAC has failed to appreciate that appellant has judgment in his own case being appeal no. ITA No.2251/Ahd/2015 DATED 30/09/2021 against which no appeal has been filed before High Court and therefore said appellate order dated 30/09/2021 has become final and binding therefore NFAC has ought to have given

THE VISNAGAR NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.,MEHSANA vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-GANDHINAGAR (PREVIOUSLY DCIT, PATAN CIRCLE, PATAN), GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 738/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.738, 1414 & 1415/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : (2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) The Visnagar Nagarik Sahakari The Assistant Commissioner Bank Ltd.,(Under Liquidation) बनाम Of Income Tax, / Market Yard, Circle Gandhinagar. V/S. Visnagar, (Previously Dcit, Mehsana-384315, Patan Circle, Patan) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaaft8764C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A P Nanavaty, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 26/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”], All Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”], Arising From The Assessments Framed By The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle, Patan [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Assessing Officer Or Ao”] Under Section 143(3) Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri A P Nanavaty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(4)

delay in filing appeal before NFAC may be condoned. 4. Ld. NFAC has failed to appreciate that appellant has judgment in his own case being appeal no. ITA No.2251/Ahd/2015 DATED 30/09/2021 against which no appeal has been filed before High Court and therefore said appellate order dated 30/09/2021 has become final and binding therefore NFAC has ought to have given

SHRI DEVENDRA THAKERSHIBHAI THAKKAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 587/AHD/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.587/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2913-14 Devendra Thakershibhai The Ito बनाम/ Thakkar Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Prop. Of Prism Agri Ahmedabad – 380 015 Tradelink Ravjipura Nava Bazar, Bavla Tal: Dascroi Ahmedabad – 380 057 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aospt 8109 B अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Mehul Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 09/01/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Mehul Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 145(2)

delay is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. On Merits 7. During the course of hearing before us the Authorised Representative (AR) of the assessee argued on the basis of key points relating to – - Verification of Books of Accounts in the Remand Report by the AO. - Summons to Sundry Creditors/Debtors by the AO. - Contradiction

KANTIBHAI CHATURBHAI PATEL CHARITABLE TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee isallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1300/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Nov 2024

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri A. P. Singh, CIT. DRFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 124(1)(ac)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

condonation of delay in this regard. Therefore, the application filed by the assessee in Form 10AB u/s.12A(1)(ac)(v)of the Act was rejected by the Ld. CIT(E) vide the impugned order and the provisional registration granted earlier was also cancelled. 3. Aggrieved with the order of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee is in appeal before us.The

AIRONA TILES LIMITED,SABARKANTHA vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE HIMATNAGAR PRESENTLY THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1127/AHD/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1127/Ahd/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2016-17 Airona Tiles Limited The Dcit बनाम/ Ceramic City Circle Himatnagar. V/S. At & Post : Dalpur Presently The Dcit, Kathwada Road Circle-2(1)(1) Sabarkantha – 383 120 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aanca 3712 D (अपीलाथ$/ Appellant) (%& यथ$/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anil N. Shah & Aatish Shah Ars Revenue By : Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19 /03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20 /03/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 13.10.2022 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Dated 21.12.2018 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] By Dcit/Acit, Circle Himatnagar [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17. Airona Tiles Ltd. Vs. The Dcit, Circle Himatnagar - Presently The Dcit, Circle-2(1)(1) Asst. Year : 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Anil N. Shah &For Respondent: Shri Purshottam Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 40A(3)Section 43BSection 68

delayed deposit of employees' contribution to PF. - Rs.10,100/- under Section 43B of the Act on account of Disallowance of professional tax. - Rs.9,640/- relating to (Prior period expenses) disallowed as they pertained to an earlier year. - Rs.65,000/- under Section 40A(3) of the Act being cash payment exceeding Rs.20,000/- in a day. - Rs.12,80,000/- under Section

M/S. B. NANJI A,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(3)(12), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1859/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Annapurna Gupta & Ms.Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.1859/Ahd/2018 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2014-15 M/S.B. Nanji A Ito, Ward-3(3)(12) Pan : Aakfb 3025 G Vs. Ahmedabad. C/O. Mehta Lodha & Co. Chartered Accountants 105, Sakar-I, Nr. Gandhigram Railway Station, Off Ashram Road Ahmedabad 380 009. (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Shri P.D. Shah, Ca Revenue By : Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 05/04/2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 20/04/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri P.D. Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Kumar Sharma
Section 143(3)Section 68

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the Asst.Year 2014- 15. 2. At the time of hearing, it is noticed that the Registry pointed out appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal is time barred by 104 days. It is seen from the record that no application for condonation

AARK INFOSOFT PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 681/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Feb 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18 Vs. Aark Infosoft Private Limited, The Acit, 45, Shetrunjay, 2Nd Floor, Above Circle-1(1)(1), Central Bank Of India, Bhattha Ahmedabad Cross Road, Paldi, Ahmedabad Gujarat-380007 Pan : Aahca 9986 H अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri Divyang Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 27.07.2023 Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Whether On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Issuing A Notice U/S 143(2) Of The Act? 2. Whether On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Disallowance Of Employees' Contribution To Pf & Esic Of Rs.5,51,657/- U/S 36(1) (Va) Of The Act?

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Santosh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 250Section 269SSection 36(1)Section 40Section 68

condone the delay and treat the return as valid return – which means in clear terms and very clear language that the assessee can cure/remove defects upto to the framing of the assessment. This clearly implies that the Assessing Officer can proceed with the assessment without waiting for the removal of defects, which as per law can be removed upto

RUSHABH RAMESHBHAI PRAJAPATI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2090/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 210Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40

condone the delay of 124 & 72 days in the filing of both the present appeals. The assessee had adduced sufficient cause for the delay, the same being attributed to uncontroverted fact of the notices of hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) as also the order passed being served on the wrong email ID of the assessee. 7. We shall first

RUSHABH RAMESHBHAI PRAJAPATI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY. CIT, GANDHINAGAR CIRCLE, GANDHINAGAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2091/AHD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), SHRI T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 210Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)Section 40

condone the delay of 124 & 72 days in the filing of both the present appeals. The assessee had adduced sufficient cause for the delay, the same being attributed to uncontroverted fact of the notices of hearing before the Ld. CIT(A) as also the order passed being served on the wrong email ID of the assessee. 7. We shall first

M/S. RATNAVEER STAINLESS PRODUCTS PVT. LTD.,,VADODARA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

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

ITA 1116/AHD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri B.P. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

delay of 1074 days is condoned. 6. Now coming to the merits of the case, the facts are that the assessee filed return of income on 26.09.2010 declaring total income at Rs.1,52,38,160/- . The case was selected for scrutiny and notice under Section 143(2) of the Act has been issued on 27.09.2011. The assessee is engaged

SHREE DHAIN AUTO LOGISTICS PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1)(1) (PREVIOUSLY THE DCIT- CICLE-2(1)(1)), VADODARA

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

ITA 392/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Feb 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

Section 143(3)Section 271DSection 40A(2)(b)Section 43B

section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2015-16. I.T.A No. 392/Ahd/2024 A.Y. 2015-16 Page No 2 Shree Dhain Auto Logistics Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO 2. The registry has noted that there is a delay of 124 days in filing the above appeal. The assessee filed

RAMESHBHAI KALABHAI PATEL,KHEDA vs. ASST. UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPT. ( PRESENT JURI.- WARD 1, NADIAD), KHEDA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1531/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Tr Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Adjournment ApplicationFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

delay in filing Appeal-condoned 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- ITA Nos. 1531-1532/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2015-16 - 2– 1. The Learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in passing an Ex-parte order and dismissing the appeal of the Appellant. It is submitted that the Appellant could not complied to the notices issued

RAMESHBHAI KALABHAI PATEL,KHEDA vs. ASST. UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPT. ( PRESENT JURI.- WARD 1, NADIAD ), KHEDA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1532/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri Tr Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Adjournment ApplicationFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

delay in filing Appeal-condoned 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- ITA Nos. 1531-1532/Ahd/2025 Asst. Year : 2015-16 - 2– 1. The Learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in passing an Ex-parte order and dismissing the appeal of the Appellant. It is submitted that the Appellant could not complied to the notices issued

PRADEEP KUMAR JOSHI (L/H SMT. SANGEETA P. JOSHI) ,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1 INT.TAXA., AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 452/AHD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed& Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Divyang Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 3(1)(b)Section 6(1)(a)

delay of 124 days in filing the instant appeal before us. The explanation in this regard as made by the Ld. AR is this that the assessee’s legal heir received the order passed by the First Appellate Authority only on 15.03.2020. Immediately thereafter the lock down started on 25.03.2020 due to Covid-19 pandemic and remained for approximately

M/S. SOFTRACK VENTURE INVESTMENT LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(2),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2154/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 2154/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2011-2012 M/S. Softract Venture Investment Ltd., I.T.O, C/O Nanavaty & Associates, Vs. Ward-8(2), A/18, 3Rd Floor, Ahmedabad. Narayan Chambers, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad-383009. Pan: Aaocs4146C

For Appellant: Shri A.P. Nanavaty, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(vii)

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. Asstt. Year 2011-12 3 7. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty levied by the AO for Rs. 1,42,50,310/- on account of furnishing inaccurate particulars of income under the provisions of section

SUZLON ENERGY LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT(OSD) CIRCLE-8, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1621/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

Section 115JB of the Act. 6.2. In this connection Co-ordinate Bench of the Bangalore Tribunal in the case of DCIT -Vs- Subex Technology Ltd. reported (2015) 63 taxmann.com 124 held as follows: “… 4. The question is whether credit u/s.90 of the IT Act, would be given on tax liability under MAT provisions of the Act. We find that

THE DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. SUZLON ENERGY LTD., AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1517/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

Section 115JB of the Act. 6.2. In this connection Co-ordinate Bench of the Bangalore Tribunal in the case of DCIT -Vs- Subex Technology Ltd. reported (2015) 63 taxmann.com 124 held as follows: “… 4. The question is whether credit u/s.90 of the IT Act, would be given on tax liability under MAT provisions of the Act. We find that