SHRI NAGIN A VAGHELA,VADODARA vs. THE DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed for A

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyali.T(Ss).A. Nos.449/Ahd/2019 & 44/Ahd/2020 (A.Ys.: 2011-12 & 2012-13) Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs. Shri Nagin A. Vaghela, Tax, 11, Purva Bunglow, Nr. Central Circle-3, Manglam Duple, Sama, Vadodara Vadodara [Pan No.Aakpw5302R] (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

delayed return for A.Y. 2011-12 on June 26, 2015, declaring a total income of ₹34,05,800/-. Subsequently, notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued to the assessee. A detailed questionnaire was sent on August 3, 2015, but the assessee did not comply. The assessee, who derived IT(SS)A Nos.449 & 44/Ahd/2019&2020 & 1562/Ahd/2019 & 270/Ahd/2021 DCIT

SMT. NEELU SANJAY GUPTA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Ms. Suchitra R. Kambleassessment Year : 2013-14 Smt. Neelu Sanjay Gupta, The Dy. Cit, Vs. 9Th Floor, Cambay Grand Hotel, Central Circle-2(2), S.G. Highway, Thaltej, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-380054 Pan : Adypg 0351 K अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Bhati, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.N. Dsouza, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 29.02.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.05.2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Annapurna Gupta

249 of Income-tax Act, which provides powers to the ld. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before him, has also been used in Section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then

RADHE FINSEC INDIA LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

section 249(3) are not fulfilled, and hence, the appeal is treated as time barred. The learned CIT(Appeals) erred in so holding inspite of the fact that the Appellant had filed an affidavit explaining the reasonability of the cause in delay in filing appeal before him by way of affidavit explaining the circumstances due to which the delay occurred

YOGESH JASHUBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4) NOW WARD- 1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.158/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.159/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 Yogesh Jashubhai Patel, The Income Tax Officer Harivallabh Society बनाम/ Ward-3(4) V/S. Naroda Now Ward-1(2)(1) Opp. Devi Cinema Ahmedabad – 380 051 Ahmedabad – 382 345 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Audpp 9058 L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 06/01/2023 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-2012. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal In Ita No.158/Ahd/2023:

249(3) of the Act. The delay was neither deliberate nor due to negligence but occasioned by genuine circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay and adjudicated the appeal on merits. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [1987] ITA Nos.158 & 159/Ahd/2023 Yogesh

YOGESH JASHUBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4) NOW WARD- 1(2)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal1. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.158/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 2. आयकर अपील सं /Ita No.159/Ahd/2023, Asst.Year 2011-12 Yogesh Jashubhai Patel, The Income Tax Officer Harivallabh Society बनाम/ Ward-3(4) V/S. Naroda Now Ward-1(2)(1) Opp. Devi Cinema Ahmedabad – 380 051 Ahmedabad – 382 345 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Audpp 9058 L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Advocate Revenue By : Shri C. Dharani Nath, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/11/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 06/01/2023 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2011-2012. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal In Ita No.158/Ahd/2023:

249(3) of the Act. The delay was neither deliberate nor due to negligence but occasioned by genuine circumstances beyond the control of the assessee. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) ought to have condoned the delay and adjudicated the appeal on merits. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others [1987] ITA Nos.158 & 159/Ahd/2023 Yogesh

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

section 249(4) are fulfilled, then the assessee be given an opportunity to remove all other irregularities, if any, i.e. submission of a signed form no.35, application for condonation of delay

SHIVAM WATER TREATERS PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

section 249(4) are fulfilled, then the assessee be given an opportunity to remove all other irregularities, if any, i.e. submission of a signed form no.35, application for condonation of delay

TAHERALI ZABUAWALA,VADODARA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 249(3) of the Act and the principles governing condonation of delay as laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and various High Courts, the CIT(Appeals) held that ignorance of law is no excuse and that the reasons put forth by the assessee were vague, unsubstantiated and reflected lack of due diligence. On this basis

SHRI GAURAV VINODBHAI MITRA,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(2), AHMEDABAD

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Ms.Annapurna Gupta

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld.Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before him, has also been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen 7 for consideration before Hon’ble High Court as well as before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, then

MR. KANTILAL LAXMICHAND JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 799 & 800/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Ito Jain Ward - 1(2)(3), Vs. 22 Jakorbal Chamber, Opp. Ahmedabad Madhubaug Panchkuwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abbpj6013E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. Dr 19/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.12.2023 & 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

delay in filing the appeals is condoned. 3. The issue involved in both the appeals is identical and the two appeals were heard together. Therefore, these appeals are being disposed of vide this common order. We will take ITA No.800/Ahd/2024 for A.Y. 2014-15 as the lead case. 4. The brief facts of the case are that no return

MR. KANTILAL LAXMICHAND JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble, Judical Member & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 799 & 800/Ahd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बनाम/ Mr. Kantilal Laxmichand Ito Jain Ward - 1(2)(3), Vs. 22 Jakorbal Chamber, Opp. Ahmedabad Madhubaug Panchkuwa, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, 380002 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Abbpj6013E (Appellant) .. (Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.R. ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. Dr 19/09/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 03/10/2024 O R D E R Per Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Am: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, (In Short ‘The Cit(A)’), Dated 29.12.2023 & 28.12.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively.

delay in filing the appeals is condoned. 3. The issue involved in both the appeals is identical and the two appeals were heard together. Therefore, these appeals are being disposed of vide this common order. We will take ITA No.800/Ahd/2024 for A.Y. 2014-15 as the lead case. 4. The brief facts of the case are that no return

DHARMESHKUMAR R. TRIVEDI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(2)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmed"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year : 2015-16 Dharmeshkumar R. Trivedi Ito, Ward-5(2)(3) Ahmedabad. 12, Panchvati Society Vs. Panchwati Second Lane Ambawadi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Adqpt 4177 J

section 249 of Income Tax Act provides powers to the ld.Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner if he is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. We are of the view that the reasons explained by the assessee before the ld.CIT(A) are sufficient enough to condone

RAJENDRA SHAKHARAM BADGUJAR,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Ms.Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2020-21 Mr.Rajendra Shakharam Badgujar The Ito, Ward-5(3)(2) 42, Jay Raghunath Society Vs. Vejalpur Priya Cinema Road Ahmedabad. Krushnanagar Saijpur Ahmedabad 382 346. Pan : Afupb 1181 J (Applicant) (Responent)

section 249(2). As mentioned in Form-35, the assessee sought condonation of delay stating that he was suffering from health conditions, was under medical treatment and medication, and was therefore not in a mental state to file the appeal in time. It was also explained that the accountant left the job on short notice, resulting in further difficulty

SMT. RUPA MAHESHKUMAR GANDHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-"नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt.Year : 2010-11 Smt.Rupa Maheshbhai Gandhi Ito, Ward-3(2)(10) D-404, 5Th Floor, Dharnidhar Tower Ahmedabad. Vs. Paldi, Ahmedabad. Pan : Abupg 5905 D

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld.Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon’ble High Court as well as before the Hon’ble Supreme Court

HUSENI STATIONERY & PAPER MART,GODHRA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, GODHRA, GODHRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

4– condone the delay and held that the appeal was required to be filed within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, as per section 249

HUSENI STATIONERY & PAPER MART,GODHRA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, GODHRA, GODHRA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA 1971/Ahd/2024 is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

4– condone the delay and held that the appeal was required to be filed within 30 days from the date of receipt of the order, as per section 249

VARUN KAMALCHAND JAIN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-5(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Smt. Annapurna Gupta

249(2) of the I.T. Act the appellant should have filed the appeal within 30 days from the date of the service of the order i.e. on 14.12.2018 but the same has been filed on 05.02.2019 with the delay of 53 days . The appellant filed condonation of delay in Form No.35 at column NO.15 and the relevant portion

AIR WIND GREEN ENERGY LIMITED,BHAVNAGAR vs. THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-1, BHAVNAGAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

section 249(2) of the Act, the assessee was required to file the appeal on or before 24.08.2023. However, the appeal was filed only on 15.08.2024, resulting in a delay of 355 days in filing the appeal. The assessee filed an application seeking Air Wind Green Energy Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst. Year –2018-19 - 4– condonation

ALPESHBHAI BALDEVBHAI RABARI,MEHSANA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, MEHSANA

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

Bench: S/Shri Sanjay Garg & Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-2018 Alpeshbhai Baldevbhai Rabari Ito, Ward-1 3, Rabarivas, Palaj Vs. Mehsana. Mehsana 384 410 Gujarat. Pan : Bwgpr 0788 H (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Dhrunal Bhatt, Ar Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Rupavatia, Sr.Dr Revenue By सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 30/09/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/10/2025

section 249(3). It was observed that the assessee was in receipt of the assessment order on 02.12.2019 itself and had ample time to consider the implications and take appropriate legal remedies. The plea of ignorance of law, according to the CIT(A), could not be a valid ground for condonation. The learned CIT(A) accordingly rejected the application