SHREE SHANTANU VIDHYAPEETH SOCIETY ,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condonation of delay petition received on 14-05-\n2025, contended that the order of the CIT(A) remained in the possession of\nthe Secretary of the Assessee Society, and, therefore, the appeal could not be\nfiled within time. However, in a subsequent affidavit, dated 30-07-2025, the\nAssessee Society has now furnished a revised explanation stating that the\nSecretary

C.I. FINLEASE PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-1(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

6)\nThe appellant\nThe respondent\nCIT\nCIT(A)\nDepartmental Representative\nGuard File\nSd/-\n(B.M. BIYANI)\nACCOUNTANT MEMBER\nBy order\nSr. Private Secretary\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore\nPage 22 of 22", "summary": { "facts": "The assessee filed an appeal after a significant delay of approximately 7 years and 14 days. The delay was attributed to the negligence

SAQUIB AHMED,PIPARIYA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is dismissed

6) Guard File\nBy order\nSenior Private Secretary\nIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal\nIndore Bench, Indore", "summary": { "facts": "The assessee filed an appeal against the order passed by the Pr. CIT under section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The appeal was filed with a significant delay of 3 years beyond the prescribed time limit.", "held": "The Tribunal held that

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

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 24 Aatma Prakash Mental Health Foundation, Indore. 4. At first, we would like to reproduce the impugned order passed by CIT(E) by which the assessee’s application has been rejected:- Page

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

6 years & 83 days 7 years in other case. He described these delays as “inordinate long delays”. He submitted that the law mandates filing of appeal within a prescribed period only and even one day delay is objectionable. He submitted that small delay of a few days or even a few months can be condoned on sufficient cause being shown

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT, 1(2), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

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

6 years & 83 days 7 years in other case. He described these delays as “inordinate long delays”. He submitted that the law mandates filing of appeal within a prescribed period only and even one day delay is objectionable. He submitted that small delay of a few days or even a few months can be condoned on sufficient cause being shown

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

253(5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a\njudicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.\nPage 6 of 9\nAnil Turakhia\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025-\nAYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15\n5. Ld. AR next submitted that the section

VINAYAK CARE SOLUTATION (P) LTD.,MUMBAI vs. THE OTO WARD 3(2), BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Boradassessment Year: 2011-12 Vinayak Care Solutions Pvt. Ito-3(2) Ltd. Bhopal बनाम/ 115, Atlanta Estate Vs. Goregaon, Mulund Link Road, Goregaon (E), Mumbai (Appellant) (Revenue ) P.A. No.Aabcv8500G Appellant By S/Shri Sumit Nema & P.D. Nagar Ars Revenue By Shri K.G. Goyal, Dr Date Of Hearing: 10.02.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.02.2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per Kul Bharat, J.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against Order Of The Cit(A)-2, Bhopal Dated 08.02.2016 For The Assessment

253 ITR 798(SC) held as under: In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

253(5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a\njudicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.\nPage 6 of 9\nAnil Turakhia\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025-\nAYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15\n5.\nLd. AR next submitted that the section

SHRI KISHAN YADAV,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

delay and decided to condone it to ensure substantial justice. The appeal was admitted and the matter was remanded.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "143(3)", "54B", "250(6)", "253

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

253(5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a\njudicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.\nPage 6 of 9\nAnil Turakhia\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025-\nAYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15\n5.\nLd. AR next submitted that the section

ABDE ALI,INDORE vs. ITO , BURHANPUR

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

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

253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience & brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .In the ITA No:- 647/Ind/2025 the Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/250/2024-25/1066202361(1) dated 28.06.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which

ABDE ALI,INDORE vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

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

253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience & brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .In the ITA No:- 647/Ind/2025 the Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/250/2024-25/1066202361(1) dated 28.06.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which

ANIL TURAKHIA,INDORE vs. ITO-5(1), INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

253(5) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a\njudicious view, condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing.\nPage 6 of 9\nAnil Turakhia\nITA Nos.593 to 596/Ind/2025-\nAYs: 2013-14 & 2014-15\n5.\nLd. AR next submitted that the section

KALPANA NARWARE,BETUL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BETUL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

section 249(3) r.w.s. 253(5) of the Act and the decision of\nKalpana Narware\nITA No. 202/Ind/2025 - AY 2017-18\nHon'ble Supreme Court, we condone the delay occurred at the stage of filing\nfirst-appeal before CIT(A).\n5. On merit of case, Ld. AR for assessee submitted that the assessee has\nmade part-participation during assessment-proceeding

MAMTA DHOLPURE,INDORE vs. ITO 3(3), INDORE

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding a sufficient cause for the delay. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had passed an ex-parte order without properly adjudicating the grounds raised by the assessee.", "result": "Remanded", "sections": [ "143(3)", "250(6)", "253

KUSUM GEORGE JACOB,BHOPAL vs. ITO - 2(1) BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, HOSHANGABAD

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

section 253(5) and the\ndecision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay,\nadmit appeal and proceed with hearing.\n5. The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the\nassessee “Late Shri George Jacob” was an employee of “Bharat Heavy\nElectricals Limited, Bhopal”. For AY 2012-13, the assessee did not file

RAMRATI SAHU,BHOPAL vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

condoned the delay. The appeal was admitted for hearing.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": [ "263", "143(3)", "54B", "253(5)", "250(6