VIJAY KUMAR PAREKH,INDORE vs. WARD1(1) INDORE, INDORE

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

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivijay Kumar Parekh Ito-Ward -1(1) 406-407 Apollo Tower, 2Mg Indore Road Vs. Indore-452001 (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Afkpp 3277M Assessee By Shri Abhinava Jain & Sudhir Padliya, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2024

condoning inordinate delay of 3189 days for which no cogent reason has been given. Therefore, appeal stand dismissed in limine in view of provision of section 249 (3) of Income tax Act, 1961 read with Faceless Appeal Scheme 2020 Paragraph 5(1)(ii) 8. As a result, appeal for A.Y. 2013-14 is dismissed in limine.” Page 7

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

7 ACK No:\n567739291300318 and on page 1 under caption “section\nunder which exemption claimed if any (see instruction\nPara 11e)" section 10(24) is mentioned /claimed for AY 17-\n18. The Ld. AR submitted it was claimed wrongly. Section\n10(24) was not applicable as section was claimed. Basis page\n2 of ITR-7 it was contended that assessee

RAJESH KUMAR RATHORE,SEHORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- WARD 5, SEHORE, SEHORE

In the result, the impugned order is set aside as & by way of\nremand back to the file of the Ld

154 r.w.s. 147 dated 24.09.2024 was too placed\non record across bar where interest was requantified at Rs.\n3,06,58,880/-. A compilation of all the notices, orders(supra)\nduring the course of Assessment Proceedings which were served\nat shyamsundarmantri@yahoo.in was too placed on record. It\nwas submitted that total delay before

BMG CALCUTTAWALA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. AO CPC (TDS), ITO TDS(1) INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed\"

7-08-2014 and computed the delay in\nfiling the appeal late before him. However, the assessee had\nfiled the appeal before the CIT(A) against the order passed under\nsection 154 of the Act. The said application for rectification\nunder section 154 was filed on 8-06-2017/09-3-2017 in the\nrespective years. The said application was decided

JEHAN NUMA PALACE HOTEL PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT/ACIT,5(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

7)/80-IB/80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the same was internally maintained in our\noffice as a compliance.\n4.\nThat, the Income Tax Return of the Appellant and the Tax Audit Report duly mentioned the\namount of deduction as stipulated under the Section 80IA(4) of the Act.\n5.\nThat, at the material point of time, owing

PRATIBHA JAIN,INDORE vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU, CPC, BENGALURU

Appeal is dismissed in limine

7), 80-IA(8) and the like. The case of the Revenue is that since Sections 80HHE and 80GG are not specifically mentioned in the Board circular, the assessee would not be entitled to the benefit of deductions under Sections 80HHE and 80GG on the furnishing of the audit report/proof with the rectification application.\n\n9. The submission is without

PITAMBER WADHWANI,INDORE vs. DCIT-1(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2017-18 Pitamber Wadhwani, Dcit-1(1) 101, Saakaar Kunj, 3 Indore बनाम/ Shanti Nagar, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aacpw6714B Assessee By Shri Sandeep Garg, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 11.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025

section 253(5) and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3. It further emerged during hearing that the CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s first-appeal by passing following order: “Decision on Condonation of Delay: The facts of the case and the grounds raised

HARE RAM MANDIR TRUST,BHOPAL vs. ITO-EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3.2 The Ld. AR then showed us the recovery of demand outstanding notice dated 15.11.2021 wherein for the year under consideration 2014-15 there was a demand of Rs.2,42,240/- as not paid. The Ld. AR then contended that at this point of time and date i.e. 15.12.2021 they became aware

HARE RAM MANDIR TRUST,BHOPAL vs. ITO -EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

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

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3.2 The Ld. AR then showed us the recovery of demand outstanding notice dated 15.11.2021 wherein for the year under consideration 2014-15 there was a demand of Rs.2,42,240/- as not paid. The Ld. AR then contended that at this point of time and date i.e. 15.12.2021 they became aware

BALAJI PHOSPHATES LIMITED,INDORE vs. DCITACIT 1(1) INDORE, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibalaji Phosphates Limited, Dcitacit 1(1), 305, Utsav Avenue, Indore Vs. 12/5 Ushaganj, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aadcb5654R Assessee By Shri Subhash Jain, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 25.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2024 O R D E R

condonation of delay and submitted that there is an inordinate delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) of 1769 days. The assessee has not explained sufficient cause for such delay and has taken excuse of filing petition u/s 154 of the Act which was already disposed off by the CPC on 14.5.2019 within the period of 3 months from

INDORE CONTRACT BRIDGE ASSOCIATION YEASHWANT CLUB,INDORE vs. ITO ,WARD-EXAMPTION , INDORE

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2017-18 Indore Contract Bridge Cpc, Association, Bangalore बनाम/ Yashwant Club, Race Course Road, Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Aaaai 1652 F Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpandey, Ca & Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 28.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.04.2023

7. We have considered rival submissions of both sides. We have also perused the documents placed by assessee before us and observe that the assessee has filed a rectification-application u/s 154 on 20.03.2019 to AO. We further note from a reading of section 154(8) that the AO was having a time-limit of 6 months to pass order

MAHESH KHANDELWAL,INDORE vs. ADDL JCIT (A) -1 JAIPUR, JAIPUR

Appeal is allowed

Section 154 by filing an\napplication electronically for rectification to CPC, for which the details are available on website https://incometax.gov.in/.\n5)To know the Common Errors that are made while filing Income Tax Return, you may log on to\nhttps://incometax.gov.in/portal/downloads/10-\n11/ITR%20%20V1.1%20%20Common%20Errors%20Guide%20for%20Rectification%20Request.pdf\nTo know the Common Errors noticed

NANCY ANN MILLER EDUCATIONAL TRUST,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-EXEMPTION, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year : 2018-19 Nancy Ann Miller Income-Tax Officer, Educational Trust, Ward-(Exemption), बनाम/ 64/67, Dhar Kothi, Indore. Vs. Indore. (Assessee / Appellant) (Revenue / Respondent) Pan: Aaatn4010B Assessee By Shri S.S.Deshpande, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 16.05.2024

condoning the delay in filing audit report (Form No. 10B) but the assessee has not filed any petition before Commissioner of Income-tax, and (iii) The assessee has filed rectification-application u/s 154 and thereafter come in appeal before him instead of appeal against intimation u/s 143(1). The assessee ought to have challenged the intimation u/s 143(1). 7

BABITA CHELAWAT,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), INDORE, INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed & the impugned order is set aside

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

154. However, the rectification request does not impact the correctness of the assessment order. Further, the department has launched a portal for easy, transparent and effective communication with the taxpayers and order and notices are bring served on that portal which is a legally complaint system. Hence, there is no merit in the ground raised by the appellant and hence

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

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

154 of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act"]\nfor Assessment-Year [“AY"] 2020-21, the assessee has filed this appeal on\nthe grounds as mentioned in Form No. 36 (Appeal Memo).\n2. The background facts leading to present appeal are as under:\nDevi Anusuiya Vidya Sansthan\nITA No. 472/Ind/2025 – AY 2020-21\n(i)\nThe assessee is a charitable institution

SHIPIJ RATHORE,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(2), INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

7 of\nthe application/affidavit filed for condonation of delay, we are satisfied that\nthere exists a sufficient cause for occurrence of delay and that the delay is\nneither intentional nor deliberate. In view of the settled legal position laid\ndown by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst.\nKatiji and others

OTIBAI,DHAR vs. ITO , DHAR

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

Bench: Shri Manish Boradsmt. Otibai, Income Tax Officer, 1 Yogamaya Main Gate Ke Pas, Dhar Ring Road, Vs. Sardarpur, Dhar (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aejp06636D Assessee By S/Shri Pankaj Shah & Soumya Bumb, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 08.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 09.08.2024 O R D E R

154 days in filing of this appeal before this Tribunal. The application for condonation Smt. Otibai of delay has been submitted and the reason for the said delay is that in Form 35 it was specifically mentioned that communication should not be sent to e-mail however all notices of hearing were sent on e-mail which prevented the assessee

RAMESH NANJUNDIAH DEVARYASAMUDRAM,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 2(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal is hereby DISMISSED AS WITHDRAWN

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2010-11 Ramesh Nanjundiah Ito 2(1) Devaryasamudram, Bhopal 101, Ground Floor, बनाम/ Plot No.7, Pooja Vihar, Vs. Sirsi Road Bishnawal, Jhotwara, S.O. Jaipur (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Adupd0388H Assessee By Shri Manoj Fadnis, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26.09.2025

section 154 before Commissioner of Income Tax, ADDL/JCIT (A)-2, Nagpur on 04-04-2024. However, as no response was received, another follow-up letter was filed on 25-10-2024 before Principal Commissioner of Income Tax -1, Bhopal, Copy of same are enclosed herewith. Unfortunately, no response has been received till date. Left with no option, the assessee