FIRST GLOBAL STOCKBROKING PVT LTD,VASHI, NAVI MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4(1) (1), AAYEKAR BHAVAN MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2012-13 First Global Stockbroking Pvt. Ltd., Dy. Cit 4(1)(1), Ratnam Square, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Plot No. 38/39, Sector 19A, Vs. Mumbai-400001. Maharashtra-400703. Pan No. Aaacf 0661 K Appellant Respondent

section 249(3) of the Act emp the Ld. CIT(A) to condone ndone the delay if he is satisfied that assessee satisfied that assessee First Global Stockbroking Pvt. Ltd First Global 3 had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the had sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the had sufficient cause for not presenting

SHREE SWAMI SAMARTH TRADING CO. P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)-13, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned), however here interestingly appellant have made the application by counting the period of delay by taking date of receipt of assessment order u/s 144 of the Act dated 26/12/2011 as on 16/10/2012, to calculate delay till 14/11/2013 i.e. the date when appeal has been filed and for this period of apparently delay of 364 days the appellant have given

SHREE SWAMI SAMARTH TRADING CO. LT,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A)-13, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of assessee are dismissed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am

condoned), however here interestingly appellant have made the application by counting the period of delay by taking date of receipt of assessment order u/s 144 of the Act dated 26/12/2011 as on 16/10/2012, to calculate delay till 14/11/2013 i.e. the date when appeal has been filed and for this period of apparently delay of 364 days the appellant have given

PALM COURT M PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO 41(3)(3) , MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for stati...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

CONDONATION OF DELAY IN THE MATTER OF PALM COURT "M" PREMISES CO- IN THE MATTER OF PALM COURT "M" PREMISES CO IN THE MATTER OF PALM COURT "M" PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE APPELLANT) OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE APPELLANT) OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE APPELLANT) Α.Υ. 2018-19 The appellant is Co The appellant is Co-operative Housing Society

PALM COURT M PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ITO 41(3)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for stati...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary ()

CONDONATION OF DELAY IN THE MATTER OF PALM COURT "M" PREMISES CO- IN THE MATTER OF PALM COURT "M" PREMISES CO IN THE MATTER OF PALM COURT "M" PREMISES CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE APPELLANT) OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE APPELLANT) OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED (THE APPELLANT) Α.Υ. 2018-19 The appellant is Co The appellant is Co-operative Housing Society

SARNATH CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed for statistical purposes in above terms

condoned delay in filing\nappeal for 2917 days by CIT Order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-\n25/1073286859 dated 14th February 2025. Both the society \"New\nSarnath Co-operative Housing Society Limited\" and \"Sarnath Co-\noperative Housing Society Limted\" located in same premises.\nAs per Para No. 3.4 of the CIT(A)'s order dated 27th February 2025, the appellant\nsociety had filed appeals

SARNATH CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,BHULABHAI DESAI vs. CIT(APPEAL), PIRAMAL CHAMBER

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed for statistical purposes in above terms

condoned delay in filing\nappeal for 2917 days by CIT Order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-\n25/1073286859 dated 14th February 2025. Both the society \"New\nSarnath Co-operative Housing Society Limited\" and \"Sarnath Co-\noperative Housing Society Limted\" located in same premises.\nAs per Para No. 3.4 of the CIT(A)'s order dated 27th February 2025, the appellant\nsociety had filed appeals

SARNATH CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed for statistical purposes in above terms

condoned delay in filing\nappeal for 2917 days by CIT Order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-\n25/1073286859 dated 14th February 2025. Both the society \"New\nSarnath Co-operative Housing Society Limited\" and \"Sarnath Co-\noperative Housing Society Limted\" located in same premises.\n\nAs per Para No. 3.4 of the CIT(A)'s order dated 27th February 2025, the appellant\nsociety had filed

SHRI BHARAT NAVINCHANDRA GALA ,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 41(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai ()

section 154 of the Cr.PC at Malad West Police 2 I.T.A. No. 506/Mum/2025 Station, the Assessee was not available and was preoccupied with the said proceedings, as a result of which the appeal could not be filed within the prescribed time. The appeal was eventually filed before the Tribunal on 24/01/2025, resulting in a delay of 330 days. 2.1. Having

SARNATH CO-OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD,DESAI ROAD vs. CIT (APPEAL), PIRAMAL CHAMBER

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes in above terms

condoned by the Learned CIT Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-\n25/1073286859(1) Dated 14/02/2025, thereby recognizing the genuine difficulties\nfaced by the society due to these disputes. Accordingly, the present delay may\nalso be viewed in the same light, being attributable to circumstances beyond the\ncontrol of the new committee. The copy of passed order has been attached in\nAnnexure

MANECKJI RUSTOMJI PATEL TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX CPC, BANGALURU, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan () Assessment Year: 2014-15 Maneckji Rustomji Patel Trust, Income Tax Cpc, Bangaluru, 5, 2Nd Floor, Oval View, 150 M. Karve Dy. Director Of Income-Tax Ward Vs. Road, Churchgate 25(2)(1), Mumbai-400020. Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra East. Pan No. Aadtm 1078 R Appellant Respondent

154 of the Act was served on 03.05.2016. quantum of the addition of the demand raised cannot be a ground quantum of the addition of the demand raised cannot be quantum of the addition of the demand raised cannot be for condonation of the delay. for condonation of the delay. 3. We have heard rival submissions of the parties

NATIONAL WELFARE FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaraassessment Year: 2011-12

Section 3 of the Limitation Act, (v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence

THEIS PRECISION STEEL INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 7(3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

condonation of delay in filing the appeal. It was submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was not intentional or willful. The decision to file rectification application under Section 154

THEIS PRECISION STEEL INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 7(3)(3), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negi

condonation of delay in filing the appeal. It was submitted that the delay in filing the appeal was not intentional or willful. The decision to file rectification application under Section 154

IIT INVESTRUST LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , 491)(2), , MUMBAI

Accordingly, we declined to\ninterfere in the order passed by the order passed by the CIT(A) and\nsame is sustained. As a result all the Grounds raised by the Assessee\nare dismissed

Section 154) for AY 2008-2009, after a delay of approximately 11 years. The Assessee sought condonation of delay, citing

DCIT 5(3)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S SERCO BPO PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and the CO filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shir Pavan Kumar Gadaledcit – 5(3)(1) Vs. M/S Serco Bpo Pvt Room No. 573, Ltd.(As Successor Of Aayakar Bhavan, Intelnet Global Service Mumbai – 400 020. Pvtltd),Teleperformance Tower, Plot Cst No. 1406-A/28, Mindspace, Goregaon (W), Mumbai -400104. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcv2572L Appellant .. Respondent Co No. 136/Mum/2022 [Arising Out Of 2354/Mum/2022] (A.Y: 2009-10) Teleperformance Global Vs. Dcit – 5(3)(1) Service Pvt Ltd(Earlier Room No. 573, Serco Bpo Pvt Ltd), Aayakar Bhavan, Teleperformance Tower, Mumbai – 400020. Plot Cst No. 1406-A/28, Mindspace, Goregaon(W) Mumbai- 400104. Pan/Gir No. : Aabcv2572L Appellant .. Respondent

154 shall stands restored. 7 16.09.2022 Appeal filed in Appeal filed after ITAT against the delay of 4 years order of CIT(A) 6 months and six dated 29.12.2017 days 5. In view of the above, the entire delay in filing of appeal to Hon’ble ITAT submitted as above and it is further requested to your goodself that condonation

ANANDKUMAR JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO WD 18(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed, as above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood: A.Y : 2003-04

condonation of delay of four months in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Further, he relied on the order of lower authorities to hold that since the issue was debatable at the relevant point of time, the same cannot be said to be mistake apparent from record and, therefore, the same cannot be rectified under Section 154

SHRI KHANDESHWAR SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - 27(3)(1), MUMBAI, NAVI MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Khandeshwar Sahakari Income Tax Officer-27(3)(1), Patsanstha Ltd. Mumbai C/O. Shantaram Jagtap, Ravji Sojpal Vs. 422, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6, Chawl No. 7, Room No.18, T.J. Vashi Railway Station Road, Sewri, Mumbai-400015 Complex, Vashi, Mumbai- 400703 Pan No. Abyfs 0132 L Appellant Respondent

section (3) thereof vests a discretionary power in the appellate authority to condone delay, if sufficient cause is demonstrated. For evaluating sufficient cause for condonation of delay, For evaluating sufficiency of cause for condonation of delay, the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition v. Katiji AIR (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has laid down