M/S AGRAWAL COAL CORP. PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1, INDORE

In the result all the three appeals of the revenue are

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

condonation of delay. In such cases, depending on the language of the statute and the objects sought to be achieved by prescribing the time-limit, it would be the duty of the officer to consider the documents, even submitted belatedly. Thus, this decision also supports the view that even if the prescribed form is submitted belatedly

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 (1), INDORE vs. M/S AGRAWAL COAL CORP. PVT. LTD., INDORE

In the result all the three appeals of the revenue are

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

condonation of delay. In such cases, depending on the language of the statute and the objects sought to be achieved by prescribing the time-limit, it would be the duty of the officer to consider the documents, even submitted belatedly. Thus, this decision also supports the view that even if the prescribed form is submitted belatedly

DCIT !(1) INDORE, INDORE vs. AGRAWAL COAL CORPORATION (P) LTD., INDORE, INDORE

In the result all the three appeals of the revenue are

Bench: Hon’Ble Kul Bharat & Hon’Ble Manish Borad

condonation of delay. In such cases, depending on the language of the statute and the objects sought to be achieved by prescribing the time-limit, it would be the duty of the officer to consider the documents, even submitted belatedly. Thus, this decision also supports the view that even if the prescribed form is submitted belatedly

ANDRITZ HYDRO P LTD,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing

2. At first, we shall take up the assessee’s appeal i.e. ITANo.198/Ind/2020 for the assessment year 2014-15 wherein the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “Based on the facts and circumstances of the case, Andritz Hydro Private Limited (here-in-after referred to as the' Appellant') respectfully craves leave to prefer an appeal under section

NANDA WADHWANI ,BHOPAL vs. ITO 2(4), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniassessment Year:2015-16 Nanda Wadhwani, Income-Tax Officer, B-41, Aakriti Eco City, 2(4), Bawaldia Kalan, Bhopal बनाम/ Bhopal Vs. (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Abvpw9258L Assessee By Shri N. D. Patwa, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 05.06.2024

2. The registry has informed that the present appeal is delayed by 199 days and therefore time-barred. Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has filed a condonation-application supported by an affidavit. Referring to same, Ld. AR explained that (i) the assessee is not technology friendly and that is why mentioned “No” against “Whether notices/ communication