AATMA PRAKASH MENTAL HEALTH FOUNDATION,INDORE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaatma Prakash Mental Cit (Exemption), Health Foundation, Bhopal बनाम/ 738, Nehru Nagar, Vs. Indore. (Appellant/Assessee) (Respondent/Revenue) Pan: Aaoca9170A Assessee By Shri Apurva Mehta & Shri Rajesh Mehta, Ars Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 16.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 20.05.2024

21. That takes us to the question as to whether in condoning the delay the Tribunal committed any error of law or illegality. There is a wealth of judicial literature on the subject of condonation of delay and most of the cases have arisen under section

MOHAN BHAWNANI,INDORE vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRANSFER PRICING), BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year

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

Section (2) of the Act, Ld. CIT(A) was not convinced and he rejected the request for condonation of delay and dismissed all the three appeals. Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested that primarily Ground No. 2 & 3 may please be taken which pertains to passing of ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A) by not condoning the delay

MOHAN BHAWNANI,INDORE vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRANSFER PRICING), BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year

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

Section (2) of the Act, Ld. CIT(A) was not convinced and he rejected the request for condonation of delay and dismissed all the three appeals. Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested that primarily Ground No. 2 & 3 may please be taken which pertains to passing of ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A) by not condoning the delay

MOHAN BHAWNANI,INDORE vs. ITO (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION & TRANSFER PRICING), BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee for Assessment Year

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

Section (2) of the Act, Ld. CIT(A) was not convinced and he rejected the request for condonation of delay and dismissed all the three appeals. Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested that primarily Ground No. 2 & 3 may please be taken which pertains to passing of ex-parte order by Ld. CIT(A) by not condoning the delay

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

21 and Hon'ble High Court has upheld the levy of fee u/s 234E since the day the provisions of section 234E was brought to statute and even prior to 1-6-2015 when section 200A(1) was amended to include clause (c). Hon'ble High Court has held that section 200A of the Act is a machinery provision providing

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

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

21 and Hon'ble High Court has upheld the levy of fee u/s 234E since the day the provisions of section 234E was brought to statute and even prior to 1-6-2015 when section 200A(1) was amended to include clause (c). Hon'ble High Court has held that section 200A of the Act is a machinery provision providing

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

section 274(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 vide letter\nissued vide DIN 22/1041672758(1) dated 26.03.2022.\"\n2.3 That the assessee being aggrieved by the “impugned\npenalty order” prefers the first appeal u/s 246A of the Act on\nPage 4 of 22\n06.11.2023 (Form No.35) before Ld. CIT(A) who by the\n\"impugned order” has dismissed the appeal

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 270AA of the Act completely by the assessee. The Ld. DR has placed on reliance on Kerala High Court judgment reported in (2024) 158 taxmann.com 209 (Kerala) – IBS Software (P) Ltd v/s UOI. Photo copy of judgment cited by Ld. AR of Chennai Bench of ITAT and Jodhpur Bench of ITAT were furnished under a compilation from page

RAMCHANDRA MANGILAL SARATHE,KHANDWA vs. ITO-I KHANDWA, KHANDWA

In the result, the appeal of the assesse for A

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniramchandra Mangilal Ito-1 Sarathe Khandwa Gram Mathela Vs. Khandwa

section 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 within the time limit prescribed in the law. Hence, assessee is applying here for condonation of delay for the same based on merits of the case. Further, based on the various judicial wordings by the apex court, it was held that in case of limitation issues the legislature has Page

M/S RANA & JOSHI BUILDTECH P LTD,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Rana & Joshi Buildtech Pr. Cit-1 Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal (Formerly Known As M/S Rana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. ) Vs. 218 Civil Lines, Below Dainik Bhaskar Office Vidisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aafcr9858P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26 .09.2024

condonation of delay and submitted that the assesse has not explained reasonable cause for delay in filing the present appeal and merely shifted the blame to the counsel. Thus Ld. DR has submitted that there is an inordinate delay even after limitation period extended by the Hon’ble Supreme Court which expired on 30th May 2022 whereas the present appeal

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

Section 143(1) for the Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The assessee has filed the present appeal on 24th June, 2022 against the impugned order dated 23rd May, 2021 therefore, there is a delay in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. The Learned AR of the assessee has submitted that the delay

SHRI BHAWANI SHANKAR PARASHAR,INDORE vs. THE DCIT/ACIT 1 (2), INDORE

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Bhawani Shankar Pr. Cit-1 Prashar Indore 28, Lasudia Mori, Vijay Vs. Nagar, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Bgbpp 2475 G Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 02.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.06.2023

condone delay would result foreclosing a suitor from putting forth his cause. There is no presumption that delay in approaching the court is always deliberate. This Court has held that the words "sufficient cause" under Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice vide Shakuntala Devi Jain Vs. Kuntal Kumari

JWALA MAHILA SAMITI,121 AB SCHEME NO 54 ,VIJAY NAGAR INDORE vs. CIT EXEMPTION, BHOPAL

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

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani\Nand\Nshri Paresh M Joshi\Nita No.578/Ind/2025\Njwala Mahila Samiti,\Nबनाम /\Ncit- Exemption,\N121 Ab Scheme No.54,\Nvs.\Nbhopal\Nvijay Nagar,\Nindore\N(Pan:Aabaj7364C)\N(Assessee/Appellant)\Nassessee By\N(Revenue/Respondent)\Ns/Shri\Npranay Goyal & S.N.\Ngoyal, Ars\Nrevenue By\Ndate Of Hearing\Nshri Anoop Singh, Cit-Dr\N10.11.2025\N14.11.2025\Ndate Of Pronouncement\Nआदेश / Order\Nper Paresh M Joshi, J.M:\Nthis Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Under Section 253 Of\Nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As The \"Act\" For\Nsake Of Brevity) Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Is Aggrieved By\Nthe Order Bearing Number\Nitba/Exm/F/Exm45/2024-\N25/1066565769(1) Dated 10.07.2024\Npassed By The Ld.\Ncit(Exemption) Whereby The Application Of The Assessee Filed In\Nthe Form 10Ab For The Grant Of Final Registration U/S 80G(5) Of\Nthe Act Is Rejected, Which Is Hereinafter Referred To As The\N\"Impugned Order\".\N2.\Nfactual Matrix\N2.1 That The Assessee Is A Duly Registered Society Vide\Nregistration No.03/27/03/16648/14 Dated 17.01.2014 Which Is\Nissued By The Society'S Registrar (Firms & Society'S, Indore\Ndivision, Indore). The Said Registration Certificate Is At Page 21 Of\Npaper Book Dated 17.09.2025 Filed By The Assessee Society.\N2.2 The Aims & Object Of The Assessee Society Are At Page-22\Nof The Paper Book Dated 17.09.2025 Which Is Reproduced By Us\Nbelow:\Njwala Mahila Samiti\Nita No.578/Ind/2025\Npage 22\Nप्रारूप क्र. 1\Nसमितियों के पंजीयन हेतु ज्ञापनपत्र\Nदेखिये नियम - 3\Npage 22\N1.\Nसंस्था का नाम\Nज्याला महिला समिति\Nसहायक पंजीयना\N2.\Nसंस्था का कार्यालय\N121-Ab. स्कीम नं.

21 of\npaper book dated 17.09.2025 filed by the assessee society.\n2.2 The aims and object of the assessee society are at page-22\nof the paper book dated 17.09.2025 which is reproduced by us\nbelow:\nJwala Mahila Samiti\nITA No.578/Ind/2025\nPage 22\nप्रारूप क्र. 1\nसमितियों के पंजीयन हेतु ज्ञापनपत्र\nदेखिये नियम - 3\nPage 22\n1.\nसंस्था का नाम

VIJAY KOTHARI,INDORE vs. DCIT (CENTRAL)-1, INDORE

condoned.\n3.5 Ld. DR for Revenue left the matter to the wisdom of Bench without\nraising any objection.\n3.6 We have considered the explanation advanced by assessee and in\nabsence of any contrary fact or material on record, the assessee is found to\nhave a “sufficient cause” for delay in filing present appeal as explained by Ld.\nAR. We find

RAJESH GOURISHANKAR,DEWAS vs. OFFICER, DEWAS

21 APR 2025\nwho is personaly kwor to me has bee identi\nRECOURISIDA\nDV\nO SARPPTM PATAD\nKSHIPRA Deus.rom\n3.\nThe averments made by assessee in above affidavit, which are self-\nexplanatory and which do not require repetition, were discussed and the Ld.\nDR for revenue does not have any objection if the bench condones delay and\naccordingly left

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

condonation of delay. 2. The learned CIT (A) failed to consider specific reason for delay in filling of appeal. 3. The learned CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on fact by not interpreting the word reasonable and sufficient cause in this regard. 4. The learned CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on fact

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

condonation of delay. 2. The learned CIT (A) failed to consider specific reason for delay in filling of appeal. 3. The learned CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on fact by not interpreting the word reasonable and sufficient cause in this regard. 4. The learned CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on fact

NAJMA PATHAN,DEWAS vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEWAS

In the result, all six appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

condonation of delay. 2. The learned CIT (A) failed to consider specific reason for delay in filling of appeal. 3. The learned CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on fact by not interpreting the word reasonable and sufficient cause in this regard. 4. The learned CIT (A) has erred in law as well as on fact