DEVI ANUSUIYA VIDYA SANSTHAN,INDORE vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

delay of 7 days deserves to be condoned. In any\ncase the return was filed before 31.03.2021 which is the last date for\nfiling a belated return of income. It would be pertinent to refer to the\nabove CBDT Circular which is as under :-\nF. No. 173/193/2019-ITA-I\nGovernment of India\nMinistry of Finance\nDepartment of Revenue\nCentral Board of Direct

M P RAJYA POWERLOOM BUNKAR SAHAKARI SANGH MARYADIT,BURHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BURHANPUR

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanimp Rajya Powerloom Bunkar Income Tax Officer Sakahari Sangh Maryadit Burhanpur Vs. Burhanpur (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabam5938R Assessee By Shri Soumya Bumb, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2024

condonation under the existing provisions of the Act. The CCslT/DGsIT shall examine the following while deciding such applications – (i) the delay in furnishing the return of income within the due date under sub·section (I) of section 139 of the Act was caused due to circumstances beyond the control of the assessee with appropriate documentary evidence/s; (ii) where delay

SANJANA CLOTHINGS PRIVATE LIMITED,INDORE vs. AID, CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical\npurpose

139(1)\nof the Act;\n(ii) The assessee has opted for taxation u/s 115BAA of the\nAct in case of condonation of delay is for Form No.10IC and\nu/s 115BAA of the Act in case of delay is for Form No.10ID\nin \"filing status” in part-A GEN of the form of return of\nincome

NAGAR PALIKA NIGAM KARMCHARI KALYAN SAKH SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,UJJAIN vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE, DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2019-20 Nagar Palika Nigam Cpc, Bangaluru / Karmchari Kalyan Sakh Cit, Nfac, Delhi Sahakari Sanstha बनाम/ Maryadit, Vs. Ujjain (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aactn7778G Assessee By Ms. Sonam Khandelwal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.09.2024

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. Page 3 of 9 Nagar Palika Nigam Karmchari Kalyan Sakh Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit, Ujjain ITA No. 198/Ind/2024 – AY 2019-20 3. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the assessee is a society

SHRADDHA SAKH SAHKARI SANSTHA,BARWANI vs. THE ITO, SENDHWA, SENDHWA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

139(1) of the Act. Against this order, the\nsociety filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challenging the disallowance\nof deduction claimed under section 80P of the Act am the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC,\nDelhi vide order dated 27-12-2022 passed under section 25 of the Act\ndismissed the appeal filed by the society.\n3. The said

SHRI DANDI SEWA ASHRAM,ONKARESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION , BHOPAL

In the result the \"Impugned order\" is set aside as and by\nway of remand back to the file of the Ld

139 of the Act is\ncondoned.\n(ii) In all other cases of belated applications in filing Form No. 10B\nfor years prior to AY 2018-19, the Commissioners of Income-tax\nare authorized to admit such applications for condonation of delay\nunder section 119(2)(b) of the Act. The Commissioners will while\nentertaining such belated applications in filing

GOURAV BHARGAVA,BHOPAL vs. ADDL/JCIT(A)-1 DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is partly allowed

sections": [ "143(1)", "253(5)", "43B", "36(1)(ii)", "139(1)", "234B", "234C", "250" ], "issues": "Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned

GOVERDHAN LAL YADAV,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(5), INDORE

Appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year : 2015-16 Goverdhan Lal Yadav, Ito-3(5) 112/12, Nanda Nagar, Indore बनाम/ Opp. Anoop Takies, Vs. Indore (Revenue / Appellant) (Assessee / Respondent) Pan: Aaypy9432A Assessee By Shri Venus Rawka, Ar Revenue By Shri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 22.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 24.07.2025 आदेश/ O R D E R

139(1) of the IT Act ? " This was answered by Hon'ble High Court as follows : "As is clear from Sub-Section (4) in the event of the assessee not investing the capital gains either in purchasing the residential house or in constructing a residential house within the period stipulated in Section 54F(1), if the assessee wants the benefit

KIRTI TRIPATHI,BHOPAL vs. ITO 2(4), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

sections": [ "147", "139(1)", "271(1)(c)", "253(5)" ], "issues": "Whether the delay in filing the appeal should be condoned

SMT PUSHPLATA CHANDRAWAT,INDORE vs. THE DCIT CPC , BANGLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2018-19 Smt. Pushplata Chandrawat, V. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Cpc, Bangalore. House No. 34-Bg, Scheme No. 74-C, Vijay Nagar, Indore Pan-Adapc8144L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Anil Kumar Garg & Arpit Gaur, Ca Respondent By: Sh. Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 06.03.2023

condone the delay in filing the present appeal. The assessee has raised the following grounds: “1. That, the learned CIT(A) grossly erred, both on facts and in law, in upholding the action of the AO in making addition of Rs.3,81,960/-, which is quite unjustified, unwarranted, excessive, arbitrary and bad-in-law. 2a). That, the learned

ITO(EXEMPTION), INDORE vs. AROGYA SEVA MANDAL, BURHANPUR MADHYA PRADESH

Appeal is dismissed

5)\nDepartmental Representative\n(6)\nGuard File\nBy order\nSr. Private Secretary\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore", "summary": { "facts": "The revenue has appealed against an order that granted exemption under Section 11/12 to the assessee, a charitable trust. The exemption was denied by the AO because the audit report in Form 10B was filed with a delay

NARENDRA KUMAR MISHRA,BHOPAL vs. ITO-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

section 253(5) and the decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit\nappeal and proceed with hearing.\n4. The background facts leading to present appeal are as under:\n(i)\nThe assessee-individual is a differently-abled person. Originally, he\nwas a permanent employee of Central Govt. in the Department of\nTelecom

SIDDHI VINAYAK,INDORE vs. ITO-3(1), INDORE

Appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2015-16 Siddhi Vinayak, Income-Tax Officer, 210, Dhan Trident, 3(1), Satya Sai Square, Indore. बनाम/ Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Accfs1664A Assessee By Shri Arpit Gaur, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Final Hearing 22.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30.04.2024

139(1) of the Act for the impugned assessment year 2015-16 on 25.09.2015, declaring a total income of Rs. 1,66,710/-. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny under CASS on various reasons, including low profit from large gross receipts. Total turnover of the firm for the year under consideration was to the tune

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL, BHOPAL vs. INDORE EDUCATION AND SERVICE SOCIETY, INDORE

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year: 2022-23 Dy. Cit(Exemption), Indore Education & Bhopal Service Society, Room No. 209, 2Nd Floor, Metro Walk Building, बनाम/ E-5, Arera Colony, Vs. Near Bitten Market, Indore.

139 days, therefore the appeal is time-barred. Ld. DR appearing for revenue submitted that the revenue has filed a condonation- application supported by an affidavit explaining the reason of delay. The condonation-application is scanned and re-produced below: Page 2 of 6 Dy. CIT (E) vs. Indore Education & Service Society, Indore ITA No. 495/Ind/Ind/2023 – AY 2022-23 Page

SMT. MEHA JAIN,JALGAON vs. DCIT (CENTRAL), BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanismt. Meha Jain Dcit(Central) 40, Jay Nagar, Jilha Peth Bhopal Vs. Jalgaon Maharashtra (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aeipj 3170 N Assessee By Shri P.D. Nagar, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.05.2023

delay of 30 days in filing present appeal is condoned. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The learned CIT(A) failed to consider and adjudicate upon the additional ground raised by the appellant that under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the impugned order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) is in contravention

INCOME TAX OFFICER 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a\njudicious view, condone delay, admit these appeals and proceed with\nhearing.\n3. The background facts leading to present appeals are such that the\nassessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate. For AY\n2017-18 & 2018-19, the assessee filed its returns/revised returns

INCOME TAX OFFICER INDORE 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a\njudicious view, condone delay, admit these appeals and proceed with\nhearing.\n3. The background facts leading to present appeals are such that the\nassessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate. For AY\n2017-18 & 2018-19, the assessee filed its returns/revised returns

SURESH PATEL,DEWAS vs. CIT(A),NFAC, DELHI

Appeal is dismissed

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 4. On merit of the case, Ld. AR made two-fold submissions: (i) Firstly, it is submitted that the CIT(A) has wrongly dismissed assessee’s first-appeal. That, the assessee has not filed any return