RAVINDRABHAI LAKSHMANRAV MANE,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeals filed by the assessee in IT[SS]A Nos

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed (Accountant Member), Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

138 & I.T.(SS)A Nos. 51 to 53/Ahd/2019 & Ors. A.Ys. 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2013-14 Page No 2 Ravindrabhai Lakshmanrav Mane vs. ITO 139/Ahd/2020 are filed by the assessee as against the exparte appellate orders both dated 21.11.2019 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) arising out of the confirmation of penalty levied under section

HIMANSHU BHOGILAL PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Ms. Madhumita Roy

138, B/h. Dharnidhar Temple, Vasana, Ahmedabad Narayan Chambers, Nehru Bridge Corner, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad [PAN No. APK PP3 018 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) .. Appellant by : None Respondent by : Shri Vidhyut Trivedi, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 08.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement 13.10.2020 O R D E R PER Ms. MADHUMITA ROY - JM: The instant appeal is directed against the order dated

VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ground No.7 raised by the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year:2009-10 Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd., The Acit, Circle-8, 301 Sheel Complex, 4 Mayur Colony, Vs Ahmebada. Nr. Mithakhali Six Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan :Aaacv 2354 D (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms Urvashi Shodhan, Advocate Revenue By : Shria. P. Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement: 29/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

138 cases and NAKED recovery proceedings, arbitration as well as filed complaints with CBI and PMLA and staff members have also left the company hence it became very difficult to attend the income tax matters, therefore delay of 1384 days has occurred. We note that power to condone the delay is discretionary and the discretion must be 5 judicially exercised

JYOTSANABEN CHINUBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-7(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.150/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2011-12 Jyotsanaben Chinubhai Patel, The Income Tax Officer, 42, Suryrath Society, Vs. Ward-7(2)(2), Kathwada Road, Ahmedabad. Naroda, Ahmedabad.

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

M. PRATAPRAY PRINTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

138/- by the Ld. A.O. 3. The appellant Craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or any grounds of appeal before final appeal.” 3. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay along-with an Affidavit for delay of 125 days in filing of the present appeal. In the M Pratapray Prints Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT Asst

SWASTIK DEVELOPERS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-2018 Swastik Developers The Ito, Ward-3(3)(5), 21, Swastik House Vs. Ahmedabad. B/H.Sardar Patel Stadium Ahmedabad. Pan : Acyfs 0641 R (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Prashant Shrivastav, Ar Assessee By : Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/08/2025

condone the delay of 18 days in filing the appeal and proceed to decide the appeal on merits. 3. Facts of the Case 3.1 The assessee, a partnership firm engaged in the business of construction, had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2017–18 on 27.10.2017, declaring a meagre income of Rs.940/-. The case was reopened by the Assessing

MINESH BIPINBHAI PATEL,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA

In the result the appeal of the assessee for A

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarit(Ss)A No.23/Ahd/2024 Asstt.Year : 2015-16 & Asstt.Year 2016-17 Minesh Bipinbhai Patel The Dcit, Cent.Cir.1 10, Shantivan Society Vs. Race Course Sussen Tarsali Road Vadodara. Makarpura Vadodara 390 010. Pan : Acqpp 7756 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate Revenue By : Shri Sher Singh, Cit-Dr & Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 24/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/07/2025 आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश आदेश

delay of 153 days in filing both the appeals is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. Facts of the Case 3.1 For A.Y. 2015–16, the assessee had originally filed his return of income under section 139(1) of the Act on 31.08.2015, declaring total income of Rs.1

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ADIT(EXEMPTION),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

SHRI PAVAN M.SHARMA L/H OF LATE MAHESH L.SHARMA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-9(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

condonation of delay of 1600 days. Importantly, PAN, confirmation, address of all such parties from whom cash was accepted and repaid were filed by the legal heir and therefore he was well aware of the business affairs of the deceased assessee. Considering the background of criminal proceedings against assessee, such acceptance and repayment of loan in cash are within

KELAVANI MANDAL VALVOD TRUSTEE,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 357/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2017-2018 Kelvani Mandal Valvod Trustee, D.C.I.T., C/O Sarvajanik High School, Vs. Cpc , Valvod, Borsad, Banglore. Anand-388530. Pan: Aaatk2450L

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

BHETASI KELVANI MANDAL,BHETASI vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

VASNA EDUCATION TRUST, VASNA,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

SHREE GOPAL ASHRAM,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGLORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay

SHREE GOPAL ASHRAM,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGLORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings, outer limits (within which the court or tribunal can condone delay