ASTAVINAYAK GRAMIN BIGAR SHETI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,JANEPHAL vs. ITO WARD-1, KHAMGAON

In the result, as delay in filing of appeal is not condoned, the appeal is not admitted and is rejected accordingly

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

1 and 2 herein stands dismissed on the ground of delay. The present Appeal is accordingly allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs." 5. In view of the above discussion and legal position, the delay of 607 days in filing of appeal in this case is not condoned as no "sufficient cause" has been shown

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant Mmber

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

SUNILKUMAR RAJENDRA RAI,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), [“learned CIT”], for the assessment year 2013-14. Sunilkumar Rajendra Rai vs TDS Ward, Nagpur ITA no.286/Nag./2023 The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:– 2. “ Grounds of Appeal Tax Effect 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in condoning the delay

UNIVERSAL INDUSTRIAL EQUIPMENT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 2 , NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

section 254(1) of Income Tax Act\nPER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:\n1. These two appeals by assessee are directed against the separate orders of Id.\nCIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, both dated 27.04.2023 for\n Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2014–15 & 2015–16. In both the appeals the assessee has\nraised similar grounds of appeal, raising the plea

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS), CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryassessment Year : 2012-13 Bank Of India, Dcit (Tds), Hingna Branch, Nagpur Zonal Office, Vs. Circle-1, 3Rd Floor, Csd Dept., Kingsways, Nagpur Nagpur – 440 001, Maharashtra Pan : Aaacb0472C Appellant Respondent

condone the delay in presenting the appeal before the ld. CIT(A). 6. The next issue raised in this appeal is about the limitation for passing of the order u/s 201(1)/(1A). The claim of the assessee is that the order passed by the AO was time barred in view of the provisions contained in section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISISONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRICLE-51(10, NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCEL-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CIRCEL-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,TDS, CIRCLE-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCEL-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, CIRCLE-51(1), NAGPUR

Appeals are partly allowed/allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak Ripote

Delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) is condoned. ii. The order u/s 201(1)/(1A) is not time barred. iii. The question whether the assessee is in default in terms of section