NOBEL BIOCARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, 15(2)(1), MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('IT Act'). 1961 ('IT Act'). The Appellant prays that the delay in filing the app The Appellant prays that the delay in filing the appeal may kindly eal may kindly be condoned. 2. Ground no. 2: 2. Ground no. 2: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

KUDOS FINANCE AND INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-14 (2)(1), MUMBAI

delay of 372 days\nin filing the present appeal is condoned. Accordingly, we proceed to\nadjudicate the grounds/additional grounds raised by the Assessee in\nthe present appeal.\n8. It is admitted position that the Assessee had returned loss for the\n Assessment Year 2019-2020. It has not been disputed by the\nAssessee that as per Section 36(1)(viia

DCIT 2(2)(1), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri N.K. Pradhanassessment Year: 1995-96 Dcit-2(2)(1), M/S State Bank Of India, R. No.545, Financial Reporting & बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan Taxation Department, 3Rd Vs. M.K. Road, Floor, Corporate Centre, Mumbai-400020 State Bank Bhavan, Madam Cama Road, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aaacs8577K

250 dated 06/06/2011 and said refund is entitled to interest u/s. 244A(1). 3. The Ld CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that a refund arising on account of order of CIT(A) is also squarely covered by the expression "Where refund of any amount becomes due to the assessee under this Act", as appearing in sec 244A(1

MR. SATYA PRAKASH SINGH,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-28(3)(1), VASHI

In the result, the ground so taken by the assessee so far as it relates to challenging the order of the AO as passed beyond the period of limitation is hereby allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

delay is hereby condoned and appeal so filed by the Revenue is admitted for adjudication. 5. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee has originally filed his return of income on 28-09-2012, declaring total income of Rs. 5,12,500/-. The assessment proceedings were completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income

ITO-28(3)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. SATYA PRAKASH SINGH, MUMBAI

In the result, the ground so taken by the assessee so far as it relates to challenging the order of the AO as passed beyond the period of limitation is hereby allowed

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav

delay is hereby condoned and appeal so filed by the Revenue is admitted for adjudication. 5. Briefly the facts of the case are that the assessee has originally filed his return of income on 28-09-2012, declaring total income of Rs. 5,12,500/-. The assessment proceedings were completed u/s. 143(3) of the Income

NARIMAN POINT ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment years 2021-22 & 2022-23. ITAs No.6159 & 6160/Mum/2024 (A.Ys. 2021-22 & 2022-23) 2 2. Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee, involving similar issues arising out of a similar

NARIMAN POINT ASSOCIATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhail

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment years 2021-22 & 2022-23. ITAs No.6159 & 6160/Mum/2024 (A.Ys. 2021-22 & 2022-23) 2 2. Since both the appeals pertain to the same assessee, involving similar issues arising out of a similar

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Section 250 of the Act was lying in the Spam folder of the designated staff member, due to which the Company had not received the order through the designated channel and was unfortunately unaware of the same.\nf). As per the discussions held with our consultants thereafter, it was decided to file an appeal to the Hon'ble Income

AADIVASI WELFARE FOUNDATION,JHARKHAND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalaadivasi Welfare Foundation, Plot No. 8185, Sri Krishna Road, Near Srinath University, Dindli Basti, Majhitola, Adityapur, Pan No. Aarca5995N ...... Appellant Vs. Ao (Exem.) Ward-1(1), Pratistha Bhavan, Church Gate, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

condonation of delay in filing Form 10B” 4. The Assessee being aggrieved with this order preferred the present appeal before us. We have gone through the order passed by the AO under section 143(1) of the Act, order of the Addl. /JCIT (A)-2under section 250

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act in respect of the alleged late deduction of tax at source on salaries paid to floating staff members. The Appellant denies its hability to the levy of such interest and submits that the same be deleted

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act in respect of the alleged late deduction of tax at source on salaries paid to floating staff members. The Appellant denies its hability to the levy of such interest and submits that the same be deleted

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act in respect of the alleged late deduction of tax at source on salaries paid to floating staff members. The Appellant denies its hability to the levy of such interest and submits that the same be deleted

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act in respect of the alleged late deduction of tax at source on salaries paid to floating staff members. The Appellant denies its hability to the levy of such interest and submits that the same be deleted

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act in respect of the alleged late deduction of tax at source on salaries paid to floating staff members. The Appellant denies its hability to the levy of such interest and submits that the same be deleted

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Ms. Padmavathy S

1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the levy of interest under Section 201(1A) of the Act in respect of the alleged late deduction of tax at source on salaries paid to floating staff members. The Appellant denies its hability to the levy of such interest and submits that the same be deleted

THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD ,MUMBAI vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCLE 2(3), MUMBAI

In the result, all the eight appeals filed by the assessee\nare allowed

Section 250 of the Act\nwas lying in the Spam folder of the designated staff member, due\nto which the Company had not received the order through the\ndesignated channel and was unfortunately unaware of the same.\nf). As per the discussions held with our consultants thereafter, it\nwas decided to file an appeal to the Hon'ble Income

AKANSHA YOGESH DESHMUKH,BPCL STAFF COLONY vs. ITO/DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION MUMBAI, INCOME TAX BUILDING

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961", "Section 144", "Section 115BBE", "Section 147", "Section 142(1)", "Section 143(2)", "Section 148", "Section 249", "Section 270AA", "Section 201", "Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963" ], "issues": "Whether the delay in filing the appeal was condoned

THE SONMRUG CO-OPERATIVE HSG SOCIETY LIMITED,PEDDER ROAD vs. CIT(APPEAL), MUMBAI

In the result the appeal is dismissed in limine

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Sandeep Gosain & Hon’Ble Shri Prabhash Shankarwith With With Sonmrug Co-Operative Vs. Cit(A) Housing Society Ltd Kautilya Bhavan 62Cc Sunita Apartment Mumbai, Pedder Road, Behind Mount Mumbai - 400012 Unique, Mumbai - 400036 Pan/Gir No. Aabat0916G (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Pawan Choudhary Revenue By Shri Harendra Verma, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 आदेश / Order Per Sandeep Gosain, Jm: Firstly, We Shall Take Ita No. 2794/Mum/2025, A.Y 2012-13 As Lead Case & Facts Narrated Therein.

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’), by the Office of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Appeal ADDL/ JCIT (A)- 2 for the assessment year 2012-13. The following grounds are reproduced below: “Ground of Appeal: We have already filed an affidavit explaining reason for late filing of an appeal request for Condonation of Delay: 1