SIRI SANJEEVINI PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMAT ,SIRWAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, , RAICHUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmed

CONDONATION OF DELAY FILED UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE LIMITATION ACT, 1963 The Appellant above named most respectfully submits as follows- Brief History 1. The appellant, a registered Co-operative Society filed its return of income for the assessment year 2017-18 on 14.09.2017 declaring taxable income of Rs.Nil/- after claiming deduction under section

AUGUST JEWELLERY PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

delayed deposit of TDS of Rs.84,099/-\n6.\nThe assessee, being aggrieved, filed appeal on 01.10.2024 with a\ndelay of 167 days. During the appellate proceedings, the learned NFAC-\nCIT(A) rejected the Assessee's prayer for condonation

UDAYA SOUHARDA CREDIT CO-OPERATIVE ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2019-20

condoning the delay in filing the appeal. Page 2 of 9 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 26.09.2019 declaring gross total income of Rs.1,39,87,136 and claimed deduction under Chapter VIA declaring Nil income and claimed TDS

M/S. CHILD DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OFFICER,SHIVAMOGGA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, DAVANGERE

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

delay in filing the TDS return, which is covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court. Therefore, we have to prefer substantial justice rather than technicality in deciding the issue. As observed by Hon'ble Apex Court, referred to hereinabove if the application of the assessee for condoning

KARNATAKA BANK LTD,MANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 1 (1) & TPS, MANGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue fails and is hereby dismissed

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Year: 2008-09

condone the delay of 4,900 days in filing the appeal. We now proceed to hear the appeal on merit. 6.12 On merit, we note that the issue has already been decided by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the assessee’s own case for the same assessment year cited above. The order dated 27th July 2021 is placed

AUGUST JEWELLERY PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BENGALURU, BENGALURU

delayed deposit of TDS of Rs.84,099/-.\n6.\nThe assessee, being aggrieved, filed appeal on 01.10.2024 with a\ndelay of 167 days. During the appellate proceedings, the learned NFAC-\nCIT(A) rejected the Assessee's prayer for condonation

ARYA VYSYA SANGHA,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoning the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) even though there was sufficient and reasonable cause for such delay. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not considering the appellant's response to the demand as action against the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Income

ARYA VYSYA SANGHA,CHITRADURGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, HUBLI

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

condoning the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) even though there was sufficient and reasonable cause for such delay. 4. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not considering the appellant's response to the demand as action against the intimation issued u/s 143(1) of the Income

AUGUST JEWELLERY PVT LTD,BENGALURU vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLE 1(1)(1), BANGALORE, BANGALORE

delayed deposit of TDS of Rs.84,099/-.\n6.\nThe assessee, being aggrieved, filed appeal on 01.10.2024 with a\ndelay of 167 days. During the appellate proceedings, the learned NFAC-\nCIT(A) rejected the Assessee's prayer for condonation

SRI CHANNABASAVESHWARA SWAMY RURAL EDUCATION SOCIETY,TUMKUR vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER,(EXEMPTIONS) WARD-3, BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

delay caused in filing all the above appeals before this Tribunal stands condoned. 25. On merits of the case, we have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us. We note that CPC levied 234E interest for belated filing of the Quarterly TDS

BIJU PAPPACHAN,KERALA vs. AO, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2019-20

condone the delay that occurred in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. 7. The assessee in the present case had served as a Defence personnel(Indian Air Force), drawing pension and retirement benefits which are either subjected to TDS

CHIEF OFFIER,DAVANGERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, DAVANGERE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

condonation of delay in filing the appeals and dismissing the appeals. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a survey was conducted u/s. 133A of the Act on 05.03.2015 to verify the compliance of TDS

CHIEF OFFIER,DAVANGERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD, DAVANGERE

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

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubey

condonation of delay in filing the appeals and dismissing the appeals. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a survey was conducted u/s. 133A of the Act on 05.03.2015 to verify the compliance of TDS

CHOURASIAINFRATECH PVT LTD., ,BENGALURU vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2015-16

condonation of delay of 448 days in filing the appeal. Page 2 of 7 3. Considered the reason stated by the assessee along with the duly sworn Affidavit, which reads as under:- “The above named Appellant most respectfully submits as follows: 1. The Appellant is an private limited company engaged in the business of construction. The Appellant filed his return

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS