CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,NAGPUR,NAGPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), CIT (E), INCOME TAX OFFICE, PMT BUILDING, SHANKAR SETH ROAD, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay in filing application for registration u/s 80G? 6. Appellant pray to kind allow to add, amend, modify alter, revise, substitute, delete any or all grounds of appeal, if deemed necessary at the time of hearing of the appeal. 3. The order passed by the CIT (Exemption) Pune on the application filed by the assessee, reads as under

NAGESHWARA CHARITABLE TRUST,NAGPUR vs. ITO WD 3, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

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

condone the delay of 405 days in filing the appeal by the assessee and adjudicate the grounds of appeal on merit. We find that the Assessing Officer has also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The levy of penalty is dependent on such adjudication because the quantification of income is since qua non. Accordingly

NAGESHWARA CHARITABLE TRUST,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, EXEMPTION, NAGPUR

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

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

condone the delay of 405 days in filing the appeal by the assessee and adjudicate the grounds of appeal on merit. We find that the Assessing Officer has also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The levy of penalty is dependent on such adjudication because the quantification of income is since qua non. Accordingly

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

delay in filing both the appeal is condoned. Now\nadverting to the merits of the case.\n7. We find that assessment was completed in AY 2014-15 on 11.11.2016 and in AY\n2015-16 on 12.12.2017. The Id CIT(A) passed order on in both the appeals on\n27.04.2023. We find that in the meantime the assessee has undergone through

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

delay in filing both the appeal is condoned. Now adverting to the merits of the case. 7. We find that assessment was completed in AY 2014-15 on 11.11.2016 and in AY 2015-16 on 12.12.2017. The ld CIT(A) passed order on in both the appeals on 27.04.2023. We find that in the meantime the assessee has undergone through

BANK OF INDIA, DONGARGAON NAGPUR vs. DY.CIT(TDS), CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

condone the delay subject to cost of Rs 500/- for each of the sixteen appeals totaling to Rs 8,000/- to which the ld AR has agreed and submitted his acceptance on behalf of the assessee. The assessee is directed to deposit the said sum and submit the proof thereof to the Assessing officer under intimation to the Registry

BANK OF INDIA,MAHAL BRANCH NAGPUR vs. DY.CIT(TDS)CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

condone the delay subject to cost of Rs 500/- for each of the sixteen appeals totaling to Rs 8,000/- to which the ld AR has agreed and submitted his acceptance on behalf of the assessee. The assessee is directed to deposit the said sum and submit the proof thereof to the Assessing officer under intimation to the Registry

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCITACIT CIRCLE-3 , NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, , NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE -3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

BHAWANA HARIRAM LAVHALE,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3, AMRAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2013–14 is allowed for statistical purposes

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

14, the decision of which will apply to the other appeal mutatis– mutandis. 3. The appeals for both the years under consideration, have been filed by the assessee which are in respect of the orders dated 07/02/2024, passed by the learned CIT(A) dismissing the appeals by not condoning the delay of 35 days and holding that the appeals filed

BHAWANA HARIRAM LAVHALE,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, AMRAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal for the assessment year 2013–14 is allowed for statistical purposes

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

14, the decision of which will apply to the other appeal mutatis– mutandis. 3. The appeals for both the years under consideration, have been filed by the assessee which are in respect of the orders dated 07/02/2024, passed by the learned CIT(A) dismissing the appeals by not condoning the delay of 35 days and holding that the appeals filed

VINAY RAMSHARANDAS AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

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

condone the delay and admit the same for adjudication on merits. 6. Insofar as the merits of the case are concerned, the facts are, the assessee is an Individual. For the year under consideration, on 31/01/2018, the assessee filed his return of income electronically, disclosing total income of ` 12,96,33,940. During the course of regular assessment framed under

SUNIL VISHAMBARNATH TIWARI,NAGPUR vs. I.T.O. WARD 1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri O.P. Kant, Am Assessment Year: 2009-10 Sunil Vishambaharnath Tiwari, Vs. I.T.O. 87, Panchvati Builders, Hindustan Ward 1(4), Colony, Wardha Road, Nagpur- Nagpur. 440015. Pan No.: Aalpt 0719 L Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale (Sr.Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 20/12/2021 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-I, Nagpur Dated 30/05/2014 For The A.Y. 2009-10 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Raised: “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee. 2. The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Endorsing The View Taken By The A.O. Of Disallowing Claim Of The Assessee. 3. Assessee Craves Leave To Add & Alter Any Other Ground That May Be Taken At The Time Of Hearing.” 2. In This Appeal, There Is Delay Of 363 Days In Filing The Present Appeal For Which The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condoning The Delay & The Contents Of The Same Are As Under:

condone the delay in filing the present appeal 5 ITA 240/NAG/2015_ Sunil Vishambaharnath Tiwari Vs ITO as we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed time and the appeal is hereby admitted for adjudication on merits. 7. Brief facts of the case are that return of income for the year under consideration