UMMEED FOUNDATION,AL SHAKREEN APT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PMT BUILDING COMMERCIAL COMPLEX

In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Ummeed Foundation, Cit(E), Pune, Room No. 204, A1 Shakreen Apt, 322, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax Vs. Waf Acomplex Chs, H-104, Office, Pmt Building Sharifa Road, Amrut Nagar, City Commercial Complex, Shankar Convent High School, Thane, Sheth Road, Swargate, Kausa B.O., Maharashtra-400612. Pune-411037. Pan No. Aaatu 4914 H Appellant Respondent

202 March 2022 and similarly for application for approval or 2 and similarly for application for approval or approval under section 10(23C), 12A or 80G of the Act in Form approval under section 10(23C), 12A or 80G of the Act in Form approval under section 10(23C), 12A or 80G of the Act in Form No. 10AB

HEMCHAND CHINTAMAN PATIL,THANE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAUPADA, TEEN HAATH NAKA, THANE (W)

Appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

202, Lovely Palace No.2, Kharigaon, B. P. Road, Bhayander (East), Thane Maharashtra [PAN: AMAPP3180E] …………. Appellant Vs Income Tax Officer, Mumbai Quereshi Mansion, 2nd Floor, Gokhale Road, …………. Respondent Naupada, Teen Haath Naka, Thane (West), Thane – 400602, Maharashtra. Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri Brijesh Vyas For the Respondent/Department : Shri Akhtar H. Ansari Date Conclusion of hearing : 08.12.2025 Pronouncement of order

HEMCHAND CHINTAMAN PATIL,THANE vs. ITO, THANE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Shri Omkareshwar Chidarahemchand Chintaman Patil, Vs. Income Tax Officer 202, Lovely Palace No.2, Qureshi Mansion, Kharigaon, B. P. Road, 2Nd Floor, Gokhale Bhayander (East), Road, Naupada, Teen Thane - 401105. Haath Naka, Thane (W), Thane – 400602. Pan/Gir No. Amapp3180E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Aditya Rai (Sr. Dr.)

202, Lovely Palace No.2, Qureshi Mansion, Kharigaon, B. P. Road, 2nd Floor, Gokhale Bhayander (East), Road, Naupada, Teen Thane - 401105. Haath Naka, Thane (W), Thane – 400602. PAN/GIR No. AMAPP3180E (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by None Revenue by Shri Aditya Rai (Sr. DR.) Date of Hearing 27.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement 03.12.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been

RAMESH LALAWAT,VASHI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 28(2)(1), NAVI MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Ramesh Lalawat Income Tax Officer, Room No 102, Goma Sadan Ward 28(2)(1), Plot No 400, Mumbai Nr Cisf, Juhu Gaon Vs. Sector No. 11, Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400703 (Pan: Aeepl2218K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee : Shri Ajay R. Singh, Advocate Revenue : Shri Bhagirath Ramawat, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.03.2026 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Vide Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1074653077(1), Dated 18.03.2025, Passed Against The Assessment Order By Mum-W-(272)(91), U/S. 147 R.W.S. 144 Of The Income-Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Act”), Dated 15.09.2023, For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. Grounds Taken By Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

202 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal as noted by the registry for which a petition for condonation of delay is placed on record. We also note from ground no.1 raised by the assessee that first appeal before the ld. CIT(A) was also barred by limitation under provisions of section

SHWETA AJAYKUMAR PAHARIA,JAYMALA APARTMENT,MARVE ROAD, MALAD WEST,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 41(3)(1),MUMBAI, KAUTILYA BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, MUMBAI

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

202, Jaymala Apartment, Marve Road, Malad West, Mumbai - 400064. Maharashtra. [PAN:AETPP1200Q] .…………. Appellant Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 41(3)(1), Mumbai Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400051. Maharashtra. …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Mr. Ashutosh Patare For the Respondent/Department : Ms. Vranda U. Matkari Date Conclusion of hearing : 09.04.2025 Pronouncement of order

SMT LAXMIDEVI SOMANI PUBLIC CHARITABLE TRUST,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 2(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

section 250 of the Income Tax Act {in short ‘Act’} for the Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2020-21. 2. In the instant case, the Assessee by filing its return of income for the AY under consideration on dated 20th Jan, 2021 had shown the total income as ‘NIL’. The Assessee’s trust then filed its audit report in Form 10B online

DCIT- CC-5(1), MUMBAI vs. HUBTOWN LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assesee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sooddcit, Cc-5(1) Vs. M/S. Hubtown Ltd. Room No.1928 19Th Floor Akruti Trade Centre, 6Th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Point Road No.7, Marol-Midc Mumbai-400 021 Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 093

section 80IB(10) of the Act, in respect of date of commencement and completion of the project has no application to projects undertaken under the scheme of Central or State Govt. Thus, in view of the fact that the project on which the benefit of deduction was claimed u/s 80IB(10) of the Act, was approved under DC regulation

ACIL NAVASAR JAN RURAL DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO (EXEM) WARD1(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16

202 ITD 480 (Jaipur 2023 AY 2014-15 held that held that where assessee, a charitable trust, where assessee, a charitable trust, registered under section 12A, filed registered under section 12A, filed its return of income within time its return of income within time prescribed, however, filed audit report in Form 10B prescribed, however, filed audit report in Form

M/S. RAKESH METAL & TUBES ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 19(3) (1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2009-10

202, 2nd Floor, 123, KIKA Street, Vs. Gulal Wadi, Matru Mandir, Mumbai – 400 004 Mumbai - 400007 PAN: AAAFR1105P (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Satyaprakash Singh, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Ashish Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 06 . 07 . 2022 Date of Pronouncement : 29 . 07 . 2022 O R D E R Per : Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member: The appellant, M/s. Rakesh

RALLIS INDIA LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT -3, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed,

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S Rallis India Ltd. Cit -3, Mumbai बनाम/ 156/157, Nariman Bhawan, Vs. 15Th Floor, 227, Nariman Point, Mumbai – 400 021. ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) P.A. No. Aabcr 2657 N & Assessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit -3(3)(1), Mumbai M/S Rallis India Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.609, 6Th Floor, 156/157, Nariman Bhawan, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, 15Th Floor, 227, Nariman Mumbai – 400 020. Point, Mumbai – 400 021. (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aabcr 2657 N

section 5 M/s Rallis India Ltd. ITA NO.3680/Mumbai/2016 CO NO.185/Mumbai/2016 145A and stated that as per the principle of stock valuation upheld by the apex court, the method of valuation regularly adopted by the appellant is a recognized method and therefore, the same cannot be rejected. The items written down to the net realizable value are items of raw materials

M/S. JAGRUTI COMPUTECH PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD, 1(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the appellant is allowed

Bench: SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

202, Maker Bhavan, 3, 21, New Marine Lines, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400020. Maharashtra. [PAN:AABCJ4436H] …………. Appellant Vs Income Tax Officer Ward 1(2)(1) Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai - 400020 Maharashtra. …………. Respondent Appearance For the Appellant/Assessee : Shri H. S. Raheja For the Respondent/Department : Shri Kiran Unavekar Date Conclusion of hearing : 01.04.2025 Pronouncement of order : 07.04.2025 O R D E R [ Per Rahul Chaudhary

SHREE PUSHKAR CHEMICALS & FERTILIZERS LTD,MUMBAI vs. CIT 7, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2009-10 is allowed

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Vp) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Shree Pushkar Chemicals & The Cit-7, Fertilizers Ltd., Room No. 611, 202, A Wing, Bldg., No. 3, Aaykar Bhavan, Rahul Mittal Industrial Estate, Vs. M.K. Road, Sir M.V. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri (East), Mumbai – 4000059 Pan: Aaacs9372E (Appellant) (Respondent)

202, A Wing, Bldg., No. 3, Aaykar Bhavan, Rahul Mittal Industrial Estate, Vs. M.K. Road, Sir M.V. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Andheri (East), Mumbai – 4000059 PAN: AAACS9372E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri S.C. Tiwari & Ms. Rutuja Pawar Revenue by : Shri V. Justin & Manish Kumar Singh (DRs) Date of Hearing: 18/01/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 15/04/2019

SALAHUDDIN ABDUL RAHIM KHAN,MUMBAI vs. WARD 19(3)(1), MATRU MANDIR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain& Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarsalahuddin Abdul Rahim Vs. Ito – Ward 19(3)(1) Khan Room No. 202, 2Nd Floor B Block Flat No. 402 4Th F Matru Mandir, West Garden View, Mumbai - 400008 Mumbai - 400008 Pan/Gir No. Aadpk7525R (Applicant) (Respondent)

202, 2nd Floor B Block Flat No. 402 4th F Matru Mandir, West Garden View, Mumbai - 400008 Mumbai - 400008 PAN/GIR No. AADPK7525R (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Manish Trivedi Revenue by Shri Brajendra Kumar (SR. DR.) Date of Hearing 09.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement 18.02.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM: The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging

NIKITA RAMESHCHANDRA KHETANI,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-27(2)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blenikita Rameshchandra Khetani V. Income Tax Officer – 27(2)(4) Block No. 202, Prakash Building Room No. 418, 4Th Floor, Tower No. 6 Vashi Railway Station Commercial Complex R.B. Mehta Road, Ghatkopar (E) Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400703 Mumbai - 400077 Pan: Bcspk0110J (Appellant) (Respondent)

202, Prakash Building Room No. 418, 4th Floor, Tower No. 6 Vashi Railway Station Commercial Complex R.B. Mehta Road, Ghatkopar (E) Vashi, Navi Mumbai - 400703 Mumbai - 400077 PAN: BCSPK0110J (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Devendra Jain Department Represented by : Shri Suhas Dabade Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 21.09.2023 Date of Pronouncement

AMSAL CHEM PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PCIT-4, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Prabhash Shankaramsal Chem Pvt. Limited V/S. Principal Commissioner Of 4G, Kakkad House, 4Th Floor, बनाम Income Tax(Pcit),Mumbai-4, Barrack Road, Marine Lines, Room # 629,Ayakar Bhawan, Mumbai - 400 020, Maharishi Karve Road, Maharashtra Mumbai - 400 020, Maharashtra स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaca3281G Appellant/अपीलार्थी .. Respondent/प्रतिवादी

delay as due date prescribed under the relevant Act fell on a Sunday or a gazette public holiday were held allowable under Sec 10 of General Clauses Act as held by Delhi ITAT in 202 ITD 116. 3. The assessee company filed return of income for AY 2020- 21 declaring total income Rs.5,23,71,930/-. Assessment

EKTA SAHAKARI PATPEDHI MARYADIT,VIRAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4(5)/THANE, THANE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18

condone the delay to take up the matter for adjudication. 3. Assessee is a Cooperative Credit Society, carrying on banking business and providing banking facilities to its members. Assessee accepts deposits from its members and gives loan to its members. Assessee filed its return of income on 27.10.2017 reporting a total income at Rs.1,91,57,850/- and claimed deduction

SHWETA SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ITO-WARD 33(3)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee. 4. In the present appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds:- “1. THE ORDER BAD, ILLEGAL AND WITHOUT JURISDICTION 1.1 In the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the appellate order framed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

KONARK STRUCTURAL ENGG PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-12, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted. 4. Further, the learned Counsel for the assessee argued that it has raised additional grounds of appeal, which is purely legal and in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 (SC), the same should be admitted