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

CCI CHAMBERS CO-OP HSG SOC. LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-17(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal

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

51,20,000/- being voluntary contribution to the building being voluntary contribution to the building repairs and amenity fund by member. repairs and amenity fund by member. CCI Chambers Co-op. HSG. SOC. Ltd. CCI Chambers ITA No. 3542 & 3543/MUM/2025 2. The learned AO erred in 2. The learned AO erred in not following the principles of not following

CCI CHAMBERS CO-OP HSG SOC. LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 17(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeal

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

51,20,000/- being voluntary contribution to the building being voluntary contribution to the building repairs and amenity fund by member. repairs and amenity fund by member. CCI Chambers Co-op. HSG. SOC. Ltd. CCI Chambers ITA No. 3542 & 3543/MUM/2025 2. The learned AO erred in 2. The learned AO erred in not following the principles of not following

RELIANCE INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX LARGE TAXPAYER UNIT, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Gosainreliance Industries Ltd. Maker Chambers, Iv, 3Rd Floor, 222,Nariman Point, ……………. Appellant Mumbai-400021 Pan-Aaacr5055K V/S

condone delay by enacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the courts to do substantial

INDIA LAND AND PROPERTIES LIMITED (SINCE MERGED WITH EQUINOX INDIA DEVELOPMENTS LTD FORMERLY KNOWN AS INDIA BULLS REAL ESTATE LIMITED),MUMBAI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 6(4), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Girish Agrawal ()

condone delay by enacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the courts to do substantial

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

condone delay by\nenacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the\ncourts to do substantial

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

condone delay by\nenacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the\ncourts to do substantial

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

condone delay by\nenacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the\ncourts to do substantial

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 ()

condone delay by enacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the courts to do substantial

HITESH SURESH JADHAV,KALHER, THANE vs. ITO, WARD 1(5), KALYAN, KALYAN

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara ()

condone delay by enacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the courts to do substantial

MINAKSHI SINGH,MEERUT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 35(2)(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

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

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 6648/Mum/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12

condone delay by enacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the courts to do substantial

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

condonation of delay, the\nassessee has filed an affidavit alongwith proof and the contents of the\naffidavit in para 4 onwards are extracted below:-\n“4. There was a delay for 3789 days in filing an appeal to the Commissioner of\nIncome Tax (Appeal) against the order under section 143(1) of the act for\n assessment year

AMAN CHAMBERS PREMISES CO-OP SOC LTD,CHARNI ROAD MUMBAI vs. THE ASS. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX BENGALURU, BENGALURU

condone delay by\nenacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the\ncourts to do substantial

SHREE PUSHKAR FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-WARD 2(30, 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 Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shree Pushkar Foundation, Ito (Exemption) – Ward 2(3), 301/302, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill Tele Exchange Atlanta Centre, Vs. (Mtnl), Peddar Rd, Tardeo, Near Udyog Bhavan, Mumbai-400026. Sonawala Road, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aawts 2303 N Appellant Respondent

51,21,991/- despite all the conditions stipulated u/s 11(2) were satisfied. all the conditions stipulated u/s 11(2) were satisfied. 2.4 That on the basis of facts and in the circumstances o 2.4 That on the basis of facts and in the circumstances o 2.4 That on the basis of facts and in the circumstances of the case

CAPCO FINANCE AND INVESTMENT PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 15 1 1 MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed on\nthe legal issue raised in ground number 2(d)

condone delay\nby enacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in\norder to enable the courts to do substantial

AMAN CHAMBERS PREMISES CO-OP SOC. LTD.,CHARNI ROAD MUMBAI vs. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX , BENGALURU

In the result, ITA No. 2077/MUM/2024, ITA No

condone delay by\nenacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the\ncourts to do substantial

AMAN CHAMBERS PREMISES CO-OP SOC LTD.,CHARNI ROAD MUMBAI vs. THE ASSITANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX , BENGALURU

In the result, ITA No. 2077/MUM/2024, ITA No

condone delay by\nenacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in order to enable the\ncourts to do substantial

INFRASRUCTURE SERVICES ,MUMBAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER 33(1)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for\nstatistical purposes

condone delay\nby enacting section 51 of the Limitation Act of 1963 in\norder to enable the courts to do substantial