BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

condonation of delay, the reason shown by the assessee is while preparing for filing of appeals against orders passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the proceedings arising out of order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

condonation of delay, the reason shown by the assessee is while preparing for filing of appeals against orders passed by learned Commissioner (Appeals) in the proceedings arising out of order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 154

TANSA TRUST,DELHI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, INCOME TAX (CPC), BANGALORE

The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2014-15 Tansa Trust, Vs Acit (Cpc), C/O Bajaj Auto Limited, Post Bag No.2, Electronic City B-60/61, Naraina Industrial Area, Post Office, Phase Ii, Bangalore. New Delhi – 110 028. Pragun Finance Pvt. Ltd. Pan: Aaatt0504A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Vasanti Patel, Ca & Shri M.A. Gohel, Ca Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.03.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.05.2024

154 of the Act, in case of other Trust of the group got dismissed. Accordingly, the Appellant was advised, notwithstanding the pendency of the rectification application, out of abundant precaution, to file an appeal against the Intimation under Section 143(1) of the Act with prayer for condonation of delay

SATYAMURTI RAMASUNDAR,GURGAON vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4(1), GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2012-13 Satyamurti Ramasunder, Acit, D-502, Ivy Complex, Circle 4(1), Vs. Sushant Lok, 1-Blocka, Gurgaon Gurgaon (Haryana). (Pan: Aaapr0741H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Grounds taken by the assessee are as under: 1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Asst. Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-4(1), Gurgaon [briefly ‘the Assessing Officer”] has erred in assuming jurisdiction under section 147 of the Income

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND (ICID PF TRUST),NEW DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

condonation of delay for filing revised ITRs with rider that the assessee’s refund claim cannot be entertained after 6 years. In such a situation where the Revenue is not considering overall facts of the case and decide the matter on merit, the only recourse available to the assessee is to file appeal before the Tribunal. 11. We further

INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON IRRIGATION AND DRAINAGE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND (ICID PF TRUST),NEW DELHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), DELHI

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed as above

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

condonation of delay for filing revised ITRs with rider that the assessee’s refund claim cannot be entertained after 6 years. In such a situation where the Revenue is not considering overall facts of the case and decide the matter on merit, the only recourse available to the assessee is to file appeal before the Tribunal. 11. We further

ABHISHEK MALHOTRA ,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-73(1), DELHI

Appeal of the Assessee are disposed off and the Appeal filed by the assessee

154 against late fees charged under section 234E of Rs.652690/- by the CPC for the TDS return filed for the period prior to 01/06/2015 on the ground that the same does not come under the purview of the Learned Income Tax Officer. Section 200A(1)(c) enabling the Assessing Officer to determine the fee under section 234E was brought into

FASHION DESIGN COUNCIL OF INDIA,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE (EXEMP) 1(1), NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine as infructuous

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediafashion Design Council Of Vs. Acit India Circle (Exemp) 1(1) 209, Near Modi Flour Mill, New Delhi Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-3, New Delhi-110 020

section 154 of the Act. The appeal of the assessee in rectification proceedings is thus not maintainable and hence requires to be summarily dismissed at the threshold as fairly accepted on behalf of the assessee owing to narrow scope of such proceedings. 9.4 However, on conspectus of all the facts and circumstances and having regard to the fact that plea

PME POWER SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

condone the delay in removing the defects by the assessee u/s 139(9) and consider such returns as valid. 3. In pending cases as on date, where the defect specified u/s 139(9) of the Act has not been rectified by the assessee, the AD would be required to immediately initiate proceedings under section 144 of the Act by issuing

PME POWER SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

condone the delay in removing the defects by the assessee u/s 139(9) and consider such returns as valid. 3. In pending cases as on date, where the defect specified u/s 139(9) of the Act has not been rectified by the assessee, the AD would be required to immediately initiate proceedings under section 144 of the Act by issuing

NARESH KUMAR,SHANTI NAGAR, MODEL TOWN, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD NO. ONE, PANIPAT HARYANA, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

154 of PB) income Rs. 4,16,63,400/- raising a tax demand of Rs. 1,61,99,640/- 2A 20.12.2023 Appeal filed by the assessee against the above intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 338 days 3. 28.02.2025 CIT(A) passed his order not condoning the (page

NARESH KUMAR,SHANTI NAGAR, MODEL TOWN, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD ONE, PANIPAT, HARYANA, INDIA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

154 of PB) income Rs. 4,16,63,400/- raising a tax demand of Rs. 1,61,99,640/- 2A 20.12.2023 Appeal filed by the assessee against the above intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 338 days 3. 28.02.2025 CIT(A) passed his order not condoning the (page

MEDSAVE HEALTH INSURANCE TPA LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT,CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

condoning the delay.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "154", "200A", "3" ], "issues": "Whether the Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing appeals on merit

MEDSAVE HEALTH INSURANCE TPA LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT,CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

section 200A should be rectified sue moto but the same has not been done. 5. Left with no choice we are filing this appeal with a request to condone the delay on the ground mentioned above." 8.2. The Ld. Commissioner by considering the delay period and contentions of the Assessee, declined to condone the delay in filling of such appeals

SHRUTI AHUJA,HARYANA, INDIA vs. ITO WARD 2, ROHTAK

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed in limine as infructuous

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

154 of the Act. The appeal of the assessee in rectification proceedings is thus not maintainable and hence requires to be summarily dismissed at the threshold owing to narrow scope of such proceedings. 9.3 However, on conspectus of all the facts and circumstances and having regard to the plea of the assessee that such FTC is eligible 5 I.T.A. No.2007/Del/2023

HUGHES COMTEL PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-11(1), DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

154 of the Act well in time. Later after 4 years and 07 months, the assessee filed first appeal against the processing order under section 143(1) 2 HCIL Comtel P. Ltd. of the Act. However, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay

B R HOSPITAL AND RESARCH INSTITUTE,NEW DELHI vs. ITO,WARD-EXEMPTION 1(3), DELHI

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

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

delay in filing Form 10B rest with CIT (Exemptions) only and not with CIT(A) by relying on the decision of ITAT, Ahmedabad in the case of Association of India Panel Board Manufacturer (supra). 7. Aggrieved with the above order, the assessee is in appeal before us raising the above said grounds before us, I observed that the assessee

JBJ TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,NOIDA vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-13(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

Section 154 of the Act. 3. When the matter was called for hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that there is a delay of 381 days in I.T.A. No.2900/Del/2022 2 filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The ld. counsel adverted to the application filed for condonation