SHRI. G K RAVI,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

378, has held that ignorance of law is not an\nexcuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation.\n7.4 In the case of Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd vs. ITAT, the Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court while dismissing the appeal because of delay held that:\n\"We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal was passed on 4th December

SHRI. G K RAVI,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

condonation of delays in the filing of appeals\nwithin the legal and tax frameworks.\n7.1 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chief Postmaster General and\nOthers vs Living Media India Ltd. 5 ITA No. 3555/Del/2009 Asstt. Year: 2002-\n03 and another (2012) 348 ITR 7(SC) and in the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil\n(dead

SHRI. BORAIAH SHIVANANJAIAH,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Asst.Commissioner Of K. Janatha Colony, Income Tax, Bidadi Hobli, Vs. Circle - 3(2)(1) Ramnagara Dist., Bengaluru Bengaluru Pan – Anaps2762E Appellant Respondent

Section 43A of the Act. Against the same, the assessee is in appeal before. 3. At the outset, it is noticed that there was delay of 951 days in filing of appeal before this Tribunal. The Ld.AR submitted that assessee has not well educated and passed only 10th class and entrusted work of filing of appeal to an auditor

SHRI. G K RAVI,BENGALURU vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

378, has held that ignorance of law is not an\nexcuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation.\n\n7.4 In the case of Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd vs. ITAT, the Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court while dismissing the appeal because of delay held that:\n"We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal was passed on 4th December

GOTTIGERE KRISHNAPPA RAVI,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

378, has held that ignorance of law is not an\nexcuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation.\n7.4 In the case of Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd vs. ITAT, the Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court while dismissing the appeal because of delay held that:\n\"We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal was passed on 4th December

SHRI. G K RAVI,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

378, has held that ignorance of law is not an\nexcuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation.\n7.4\nIn the case of Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd vs. ITAT, the Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court while dismissing the appeal because of delay held that:\n\"We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal was passed on 4th December

SHRI. G K RAVI,BANGALORE vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

378, has held that ignorance of law is not an\nexcuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation.\n\n7.4 In the case of Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd vs. ITAT, the Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court while dismissing the appeal because of delay held that:\n\n\"We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal was passed

M/S. ARHAM MITRA MANDAL,BANGALORE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTIONS)-WARD-1, BANGALORE

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

condonation petition.\nThe Petitioner was hopeful of a favorable order as the delay in filing\nForm 10B was 378 days. The Principal Commissioner of Income\nTax (Exemptions), Delhi, passed an order under section

SHRI. G. K RAVI ,BANGALORE vs. ACIT/DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical\npurposes

378, has held that ignorance of law is not an\nexcuse for not taking appropriate steps within limitation.\n7.4 In the case of Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd vs. ITAT, the Hon'ble Bombay\nHigh Court while dismissing the appeal because of delay held that:\n\"We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal was passed on 4th December

M/S. THE BHAVASARA KSHATRIYA CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,MYSURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), MYSURU

378, wherein held\nas follows:-\n\"..... But we are in agreement with the High Court on the\nother two grounds. As mentioned earlier, the impugned\nassessments were made in 1949. The writ petition was filed in\n1956. The explanation given by the petitioner for this long delay\nis that he did not know the correct legal position and he came

SHREE HANUMAN CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI LIMITED,CHIKODI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, HUBLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18

condone the delay in filing the appeals before us and consider the appeal for adjudication. 8. Though the assessee has raised grounds both on legal issue and merits, during the course of hearing, the ld. AR presented arguments with regard to the merits of the case wherein it is contended that the AO has conducted proper enquiry before concluding

SHRI. KHADARI SYYEADHUSENPEERA SYYEADKHAJAAMIN,BAGALKOT vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL PROCESSING CENTRE, , BENGALURU

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2019-20

378 wherein it was held as follows:- “..... But we are in agreement with the High Court on the other two grounds. As mentioned earlier, the impugned assessments were made in 1949. The writ petition was filed in 1956. The explanation given by the petitioner for this long delay is that he did not know the correct legal position

MNS PRINTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Mns Printers Pvt. Ltd., No.345/4, Old Madras Road, Bhattarahalli, Bangalore-560049. … Appellant Pan:Aabcm 9873 F Vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward 12(1), Bangalore. … Respondent

delay cannot be condoned as ignorance of law is not an excuse and the assessee had not revealed source of ill-advice given. The Hon’ble High Court held in parat.7 to tell as follows: “7. This is not a case wherein the appellant is an illiterate person, who may not know the repercussion in law. Further

THE KARUR VYSYA BANK LTD,BELLARY vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS CIRCLE, HUBLI-DHARWAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2011-12

condone the delay in filing appeal before Ld CIT(A). 9. We have noticed earlier that the Ld CIT(A) has also adjudicated the issues on merits. The ld A.R placed his reliance on the following decisions to submit that the non-furnishing of copies of Form No.15G and Form No.15H to the Commissioner of Income tax would not make

S & G LIFESTYLES,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

condoned and appeals admitted for adjudication. 5. The assessee, a firm, is engaged in manufacturing and selling of trousers catering to both domestic and international markets. Since common issue is involved in both the appeals, the facts arising out of AY 2018-19 are taken up for consideration, where it filed its return. The assessee has remitted employees contribution towards

S & G LIFESTYLES,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

condoned and appeals admitted for adjudication. 5. The assessee, a firm, is engaged in manufacturing and selling of trousers catering to both domestic and international markets. Since common issue is involved in both the appeals, the facts arising out of AY 2018-19 are taken up for consideration, where it filed its return. The assessee has remitted employees contribution towards

SMT. GALI VANAJA,BELLARY vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2007-08

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned CIT(A) dated, 13-03-2023 in ITA No.CIT(A)- 11/BNG/10007/2006-03 passed consequential to the order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos 1006-1008/Bang/2013 remanding the appeals back to the file of the Learned

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(3), BENGALURU vs. SMT. GALI VANAJA, BELLARY

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee and the appeal of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2007-08

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The present appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned CIT(A) dated, 13-03-2023 in ITA No.CIT(A)- 11/BNG/10007/2006-03 passed consequential to the order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos 1006-1008/Bang/2013 remanding the appeals back to the file of the Learned