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

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. Honorable CIT(Appeals) dismissing the appeal without considering the facts and circumstances of the case is denial of proper justice especially when there exists another assessment order for the same assessment year and on the same Appellant. 2. Honorable CIT(Appeals) dismissing the appeal on technical ground for condonation of delay is bad in law, unethical and against

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

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

b), 271(1)(c), and 271F are unjustified, as the failure to file the return was due to operational shutdown and not due to any intention to evade tax. Moreover, taxes had already been paid in excess. 8. Procedural Lapses in Appeal Proceedings: The Learned Commissioner of Appeals failed to give proper consideration to the condonation of delay

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

b), 271(1)(c), and 271F are unjustified, as the failure to file the return was due to operational shutdown and not due to any intention to evade tax. Moreover, taxes had already been paid in excess. 8. Procedural Lapses in Appeal Proceedings: The Learned Commissioner of Appeals failed to give proper consideration to the condonation of delay

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

b), 271(1)(c), and 271F are unjustified, as the failure to file the return was due to operational shutdown and not due to any intention to evade tax. Moreover, taxes had already been paid in excess. 8. Procedural Lapses in Appeal Proceedings: The Learned Commissioner of Appeals failed to give proper consideration to the condonation of delay

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

b), 271(1)(c), and 271F are unjustified, as the failure to file the return was due to operational shutdown and not due to any intention to evade tax. Moreover, taxes had already been paid in excess. 8. Procedural Lapses in Appeal Proceedings: The Learned Commissioner of Appeals failed to give proper consideration to the condonation of delay

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

b), 271(1)(c), and 271F are unjustified, as the failure to file the return was due to operational shutdown and not due to any intention to evade tax. Moreover, taxes had already been paid in excess. 8. Procedural Lapses in Appeal Proceedings: The Learned Commissioner of Appeals failed to give proper consideration to the condonation of delay

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

b), 271(1)(c), and 271F are unjustified, as the failure to file the return was due to operational shutdown and not due to any intention to evade tax. Moreover, taxes had already been paid in excess. 8. Procedural Lapses in Appeal Proceedings: The Learned Commissioner of Appeals failed to give proper consideration to the condonation of delay

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

b), 271(1)(c), and 271F are unjustified, as the failure to file the return was due to operational shutdown and not due to any intention to evade tax. Moreover, taxes had already been paid in excess. 8. Procedural Lapses in Appeal Proceedings: The Learned Commissioner of Appeals failed to give proper consideration to the condonation of delay

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 201(3

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

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 6 I.T.A.Nos.359 to 366, 386 to 389, 391 & 392/NAG./2022 that the order passed by the AO was time barred

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

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 6 I.T.A.Nos.359 to 366, 386 to 389, 391 & 392/NAG./2022 that the order passed by the AO was time barred

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

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 6 I.T.A.Nos.359 to 366, 386 to 389, 391 & 392/NAG./2022 that the order passed by the AO was time barred