ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST ,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,GHAZIABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONE OF INCOMDE EF, GAZIABADQQQ.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

ESTATE OFFICER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FOREST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,TDS-CPC, GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee being ITA no

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

condonation of delay, the contents of which are reproduced below for ready reference:– “We enclose herewith an appeal under section 253

VAISHALI KAKDE,MANISH NAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , WARD 4(5), CIVIL LINES

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine

condoned the delay of 282 days in filing the appeal. However, the adjournment application was rejected due to the assessee's absence and inadequate reasons. The Tribunal held that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the matter alive due to the lackadaisical approach of the assessee.", "result": "Dismissed", "sections": [ "Section 253

M/S SANT YOGIRAJ URBAN CREDIT CO-OP SOCIETY,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-4(4), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry& Shri K.M. Roy

condonation of delay, cannot unilaterally decide the appeals on the merits, more so when the appellant-assessee was not given proper opportunity to contest the matter in the main appeals on the merits. The order of the Tribunal is also not in consonance with section 253

SHAIKH MAHMOOD SHAIKH CHANDA,ACHALPUR vs. ITO WARD-4, AMRAVATI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshaikh Mahmood Shaikh Chanda, 4, Ward No.4, Achalpur, Pathrot -444808, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Alipc0613Q V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward–4, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Amravati-444601, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") against the order under section 250 dated 24/06/2025 passed by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) NFAC ("referred to as Learned CIT(A)") against the assessment order dated 27/12/2019 passed by the Learned AO National Faceless 2 Shaikh Mahmood Shaikh Chanda ITA no.541/NAG./2025 Assessment Centre, Delhi ("referred

ASHISH HARISH PARSHIONIKAR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(5), NAGPUR

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

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryashish Harish Parshionikar, Ito, Ward-4(5), Nagpur. 214, Suyog Nagar, Manewada Vs. Road, Ring Road, Nagpur. Pan: Arbpp 1844 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 253(3) of the Act, the appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) was required to be filed within 60 days, i.e., by 02.12.2023. However, the present appeal is being filed on 23.05.2025, resulting in a delay of 53 Bdays. 3. Reasons for Delay: The delay in filing the appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate

SUDHIR GOMAJI KUKDE,LAKHNI, BHANDARA vs. ITO WARD-2, CHANDRAPUR

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. The 2 Sudhir Gomaji Kukde ITA no.621/Nag./2024 reason for the delay in filing the appeal, as contained in the said affidavit, are as under:– “1. That the appellant has preferred the accompanying appeal under Section 253

VAIDIK ANUSANDHAN KENDRA,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for\nstatistical purposes in terms as indicated above

253 days in\nfiling the appeal. The assessee has also filed a duly sworn affidavit\nexplaining cause of delay.\n4. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts\nand circumstances of the case and perused the material available on\nrecord. As we have held in so many cases that with regard to the such\nallegations made

BANK OF INDIA, DHARAMPETH,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT

BANK OF INDIA, DONGARGAON,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

253(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ hereinafter] challenging respective orders of National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘NFAC’ hereinafter] passed u/s 250 of the Act dismissing the respective appeals assailed against levy of penalty u/s 271C of the Act, on the ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 1 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT