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.

20 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 166clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka104Chennai96Mumbai88Delhi78Hyderabad74Kolkata46Chandigarh40Jaipur36Panaji36Bangalore33Lucknow29Rajkot22Pune21Ahmedabad20Visakhapatnam16Raipur15Cochin14Nagpur11Cuttack8Telangana8Surat6Indore6Patna6Guwahati5Calcutta5Amritsar2Agra1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 1134Section 14714Section 12A11Section 139(1)11Addition to Income11Section 14810Section 26310Section 271(1)(c)8Section 143(3)

ELECTRONICS & QUALITY DEVELOPMENT CENTRE,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 248/AHD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

delay in filing Form No. 10B due to inadvertent or bona fide reasons deserves to be condoned under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Similar principles have been reiterated in Brahmchari Wadi Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) [2025] 173 taxmann.com 54 (Gujarat) and Shri 108 Parshwanath Bhakti Vihar Jain Trust v. CIT (Exemption) [2024] 166

7
Exemption7
Reassessment5
Reopening of Assessment4

ELECTRONICS & QUALITY DEVELOPMENT CENTRE,GANDHINAGAR vs. CPC, BENGALURU CURRENT JURIS. -THE DY.CIT, (EXEMPTION), CIRCLE-1, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1684/AHD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Ld. Pcit, Which Was Pending Consideration. Therefore Assessee Filed Appeal Before Ld. Cit(A) Which Was Dismissed Stating That The Ld. Cit(A) Does Not Have The Power To Condone The Delay, Thereby Confirmed The Addition Made By Cpc.

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

delay in filing Form No. 10B due to inadvertent or bona fide reasons deserves to be condoned under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Similar principles have been reiterated in Brahmchari Wadi Trust v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption) [2025] 173 taxmann.com 54 (Gujarat) and Shri 108 Parshwanath Bhakti Vihar Jain Trust v. CIT (Exemption) [2024] 166

M/S. ROSY ROYAL MINERALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 535/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Thakwani, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 271(1)(c)

166 Taxation 377, 390 (Del)], it has been held that as there was no findings recorded by the Tribunal that there was any deliberate attempt in delaying the matter or that there was culpable negligence or there was lack of bonafides, the application for condonation of delay deserves to be accepted. Page 3 to 6. III. Where an application

DILIPKUMAR PASHABHAI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1095/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/Sf 211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad Sp Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Atrpp 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jinesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Jinesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 68

delay of 155 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for hearing. On the legal grounds – additional grounds raised by way of written submissions: 7. The Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee, raised several legal grounds through written submissions in ITA No. 1095/Ahd/2024 (AY 2016-17) and ITA No. 1096/Ahd/2024 (AY 2017-18) challenging

DILIPKUMAR PASHABHAI PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1096/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita Nos.1095 & 1096/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Respectively Dilipkumar Pashabhai Prajapati The Income Tax Officer बनाम/ C/Sf 211 Pushp Business Campus Ward-3(3)(5) V/S. Nr. Vastral Cross Road Ahmedabad Sp Ring Road Vastral Ahmedabad – 382 418 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Atrpp 9632 R (अपीलाथ%/ Appellant) (&' यथ%/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Jinesh Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 10/09/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/09/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Jinesh Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Dsouza, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 251Section 68

delay of 155 days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned, and the appeal is admitted for hearing. On the legal grounds – additional grounds raised by way of written submissions: 7. The Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee, raised several legal grounds through written submissions in ITA No. 1095/Ahd/2024 (AY 2016-17) and ITA No. 1096/Ahd/2024 (AY 2017-18) challenging

ANILKUMAR DWARKAPRASAD MODANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)(PREVIOUSLY DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)), VADODARA

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

ITA 1572/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1572/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani The Dy.Cit बनाम/ A-17, Videocon Housing Colony Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Chavaj, Bharuch 392 002 Vadodara (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acnpm 0273 C अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26/12/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, In Which The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao)”] Under Section 50C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Was Confirmed Vide Assessment Order Dated 28/03/2016. Facts Of The Case: 2. The Assessee, An Individual Earning Income From Salaries, Trading In Shares & Securities, Capital Gains & Other Sources, Filed His Return Of Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani Vs. The Dcit Asst. Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 50CSection 50C(2)

166-173, 142, 9,00,000 63,86,339 54,86,339 and 143 (1 lac each) 3.2. Based on the above discrepancies, the AO made an addition of Rs.54,99,196/- to the assessee’s income, treating the difference as additional capital gains under Section 50C of the Act. Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani vs. The DCIT Asst. Year

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,AHMEDABAD, VADODARA. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 EXEMPTIONS, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1187/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1187/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-10 Gujarat Technological University, The Dcit, Nr. Vishwakarma Govt. Engg. College, बनाम/ Circle-1, V/S. Near Visar Three Roads, Exemptions, Chandkheda Society Area S.O, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad-382424. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg1109L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 14.03.2025, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20, Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, Under

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

condoned and the exemption under section 11 allowed. 13. In reply, the learned Departmental Representative (“DR”) supported the impugned order of the learned CIT(A) in its entirety. 14. We have carefully considered the rival submissions, perused the material placed on record, and duly examined the orders of the lower authorities. The undisputed facts are that the assessee, a State

INDIAN REDCROSS SOCIETY ANAND DISTRICT BRANCH,ANAND vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-EXEMPTION, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 697/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Kaushani Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12A

166 taxmann.com 732 (Gujarat), Indian Redcross Society Anand District Branch vs. ITO Asst.Year –2017-18 - 3– wherein the Assessee, a public charitable trust, was registered under section 12A of the Act. The assessee Trust had claimed exemption under section 11 of the Act. The Assessing Officer rejected exemption claimed on ground that assessee had failed to file Form

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the above ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 935/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 148Section 263

166 taxmann.com 732 (Gujarat)[13-08-2024], the Gujarat High Court held that where assessee-trust for past many years had substantially satisfied conditions for claiming exemption under section 11 and had also explained reason for delay in filing Form No. 10B due to illness of Accountant who was on leave for long time, matter was to be remanded

PHELIX APPLIANCES LIMITED,BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2),, BARODA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 1310/AHD/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad01 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1310/Ahd/2016 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 ) Phelix Appliances Ltd. The Income Tax बनाम/ 9, B, Shitalkunj Society Officer Vs. Manjalpur Ward-4(2) Baroda - 390 010 Baroda – 390 007 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aabcp 1857 C .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Manish J. Shah, Ar ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri Jaya Chaudhary, Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri Manish J. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Jaya Chaudhary, Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay, and accordingly we proceed to hear the ground of appeal of the assessee on merit. 6. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer by sustaining the penalty of Rs. 2,70,000/- u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. 7. Briefly stated

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,AHMEDABAD , GUJARAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1 EXEMPTIONS, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT, AHMEDABAD , GUJARAT

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1337/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1337/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gujarat Technological Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ University Income Tax Circle-1 V/S. Nr.Vishwakarma Exemptions, Govt.Engg.College Ahmedabad – 380 015 Nr.Visar Three Roads Chandkheda Society Area So Ahmedabad – 382 424 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg 1109 L (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/09/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12A

166 taxmann.com 732 (Guj.) and Sarvodaya Charitable Trust v. ITO (Exemption) [2021] 125 taxmann.com 75 (Guj.) has consistently held that when the substantive conditions for exemption are satisfied, the benefit cannot be denied merely for delay in filing the prescribed forms, which is only a procedural requirement. The Co-ordinate Benches in Vardhman Stanakvasi Jain Shravak Trust [2025] 172 taxmann.com

MEENABA DIVYAVIRSINHJI ALIAS DIGVIJAYSINHJI JADEJA,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

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

ITA 1693/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2019-20 Meenaba Divyavirsinhji Alias Deputy Commissioner Of Digvijaysinhji Jadeja Income Tax, Circle-1, Diyanirman House, Bhavnagar - 364002 Chitranjan Chowk, Vs. Bhavnagar - 364001 [Pan – Aespj 0763 K] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Mohit Balani, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashok Kumar Suthar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.01.2026 O R D E R

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 270ASection 271ASection 69

section 1448 of the Act. Under the facts, the impugned order is nonest in the eyes of law and thus deserves to be annulled 3. Learned AO has erred in law and on the facts of the case in making an addition of Rs.1,90,77,592/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of alleged unexplained investments. 4. Learned

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3343/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Rastogi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

delay is condoned. 7. The appellant engaged in the business of agency of Idea Cellular Services and Trading of scrape, filed its return of income on 27.10.2008 declaring total income at Rs.2,01,565/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 30.04.2009. During the assessment proceeding, it appears from the records that the assessee has deposited cash

SHRI RAVINDRASINH N.GOHIL,,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE,WARD-1(1),, BHAVNAGAR

Appeal is allowed

ITA 3344/AHD/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Ms. Madhumita Roy

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Rastogi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

delay is condoned. 7. The appellant engaged in the business of agency of Idea Cellular Services and Trading of scrape, filed its return of income on 27.10.2008 declaring total income at Rs.2,01,565/-, which was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act on 30.04.2009. During the assessment proceeding, it appears from the records that the assessee has deposited cash

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VADODARA vs. JAY DUSHYANT PATEL, VADODARA

In the result, we find that Ld

ITA 981/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 90

166 taxmann.com 26 (Ahmedabad - Trib.)[12-08-2024], the ITAT Ahmedabad held that where assessee was on deputation to Netherlands by his employer and salary earned in Netherlands and tax thereof was paid in said foreign country as per provisions of article 23 of DTAA between India and Netherlands, late filing of Form No. 67 could not be reason

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VADODARA vs. JAY DUSHYANT PATEL, VADODARA

In the result, we find that Ld

ITA 980/AHD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Virat Bhavsar, A.R
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 90

166 taxmann.com 26 (Ahmedabad - Trib.)[12-08-2024], the ITAT Ahmedabad held that where assessee was on deputation to Netherlands by his employer and salary earned in Netherlands and tax thereof was paid in said foreign country as per provisions of article 23 of DTAA between India and Netherlands, late filing of Form No. 67 could not be reason

SHRI INDRAVAN G. PATEL,,MEHSANA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, MEHSANA

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 372/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.372/Ahd/2017 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year : 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri T.C. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 131Section 133(6)

166, GIDC-2, Dediyasan Mehsana Mehsana-384 002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ABIPP 6502 B .. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Biren Shah, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by: Shri T.C. Meena, Sr.DR 15/05/2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement 31/05/2019 आदेश

THE VENUS PARKLAND CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SERVICE SOCIETY LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1347/AHD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 143(3)

delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee had filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2020-21 on 31.12.2020 at a total income of Rs.14,58,480/-. The assessee is a Co-operative Society formed for the purpose of maintenance and upkeep of the residential apartment Venus

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3217/AHD/2015[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1992-93

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

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

166 ITR 763,763(ALL). Tainted income: Income is income, though tainted. When a receipt possesses the quality of income, it does not shed its quality by reason of the fact that it comes from a tainted source or through tainted means. The degree of taint may vary from a simple unenforceability in a court of law of a contract

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3218/AHD/2015[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1993-94

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

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

166 ITR 763,763(ALL). Tainted income: Income is income, though tainted. When a receipt possesses the quality of income, it does not shed its quality by reason of the fact that it comes from a tainted source or through tainted means. The degree of taint may vary from a simple unenforceability in a court of law of a contract