SATPUDA FOUNDATION,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

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

5) of section 11 of the Act. 17.3 From the aforesaid Circular it would be clear that in the genuine case of belated application in Form No. 10, the delay may be condone. In the present case the assessee furnished the Form No. 10 before completion of the assessment. 17:4

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

4. We are unable to persuade ourselves to the findings of the learned CIT(A) as quoted above. The assessee had a justifiable cause for the delay. More so, the delay was unintentional without any mala fide. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A) and direct him to condone the delay and pass

SANJAY SHANKARRAO JADHAO,AMRAVATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

condone the delay in filing the present appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. However, a cost of ` 5,000, is levied upon the assessee for the delay in filing the petition, which should be paid to the account of The Nagpur High Court Legal Service Committee. In all fairness, the learned Counsel for the assessee agreed

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

4. None appeared for the assessee. We have heard learned DR and perused orders of the authorities below. We find that the learned CIT(A) has disposed off appeals filed by the assessee on technical grounds without condoning delay in filing appeals, although, the assessee has filed petition for ITA No. 3495 to 3504/Chny/2019 condonation of delay. We find that

GURPALSINGH CHANANSINGH NAGRA,AKOLA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

section 143(1) by the Central Processing Centre on 27/03/2019. 2. During the course of hearing, we find that there is a delay of 203 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed application–cum–affidavit for condonation of delay explaining the cause of Gurpalsingh Chanansingh Nagra ITA no.206/Mum./2023 delay in filing the present

M/S PHOENIX INFRA ESTATE INTERNATIONAL LTD,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals by the assessee stand dismissed in limine

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is written a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion, sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to a want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases, delay

VIJAY ENGINEERING ENTERPRISES,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WD,-8(4), NAGPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

4. In yet another case in Anil Kumar Nehru and Another vs. ACIT (2017) 98 CCH 0469 Bom HC, there was a delay of 1662 days in filing the appeal. Such a delay was not condoned by the Hon’ble High Court. In further appeal, condoning the delay, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anil Kumar Nehru vs. ACIT

SWARGIY GOPALRAO GAWANDE BAHUUDESHIY SANSTHA BHIDI,WARDHA vs. ITO WARD 4, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

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

section 253(5) of the Act. In other words, the assessee acted in a non-challant way with lackadaisical propensity for delay and the grounds on which condonation of delay has been sought, not only lack bona fides completely, but also, are not only fanciful and seems to be fully concocted on over all consideration of the facts and circumstances

M/S WESTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.253 & 254/Nag/2018 ननिाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/S. Western Coalfields Ltd. Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur-400 001. Pan : Aaacw1578L .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

4. The Ld. DR submitted that he has no objection, if the delay is condoned. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and gone through the condonation petition as well as the affidavit. We have also considered the judicial pronouncements placed before us. We find that reasons specified therein are justified and that the delay cannot be attributed

M/S WESTERN COALFIELDS LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INOCME TAX CIRCLE-2, NAGPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for assessment year

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita Nos.253 & 254/Nag/2018 ननिाारण वषा / Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2010-11 M/S. Western Coalfields Ltd. Coal Estate, Civil Lines, Nagpur-400 001. Pan : Aaacw1578L .......अऩीऱाथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

4. The Ld. DR submitted that he has no objection, if the delay is condoned. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and gone through the condonation petition as well as the affidavit. We have also considered the judicial pronouncements placed before us. We find that reasons specified therein are justified and that the delay cannot be attributed

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of taxable income. The assessee being aggrieved, carried the matter before the first appellate authority. 5. The learned CIT(A), on a perusal of Form no.35, observed that there is a delay of 405 days in filing the appeal before him. The assessee, while 4 Nageshwara Charitable Trust

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

section 271(1)(c) of the Act separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of taxable income. The assessee being aggrieved, carried the matter before the first appellate authority. 5. The learned CIT(A), on a perusal of Form no.35, observed that there is a delay of 405 days in filing the appeal before him. The assessee, while 4 Nageshwara Charitable Trust

SHRI VYANKANATH MAHARAJ SHIKSHAN SANSTHA MURTIZAPUR,AKOLA vs. ITO WARD - 2, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

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

4. The application for condonation of delay is also supported by a duly sworn affidavit of Shri Ramesh Chaudhari. We are satisfied that there is sufficient and reasonable cause and there is no mala fide intention. Accordingly, delay of 45 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal is hereby condoned and we proceed for adjudication. 5. Shri Dewani, learned

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

5. After considering the contents of the application seeking condonation of delay and the averments made in the Affidavit and the case laws relied upon by him, we are of the opinion that no mal fide intention can be thrust upon the assessee for the delay in filing of appeal and we are satisfied that the delay of 331 days

SHUBHLAXMI LAND DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(5), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

4. After considering the submissions of the learned Authorised Representative and averments made in the Affidavit, I am of the opinion that the assessee is prevented in filing the appeal belatedly and I am satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. Consequently, I condone the delay of 52 days in filing the present appeal

PANHERA GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,BULDHANA vs. ITO WARD-2, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON

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

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

section 250 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. That, the order under appeal is served on the Assessee on 14/06/2024 because of which the appeal was to be filed on or before the 13/08/2024. However, the appellant E-filed Form No. 36 on 24/08/2024 and uploaded the signed documents on 25/09/2024, hence there is a delay

GAJANAND FINANCIAL CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

condone the delay of 267 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit, as no mala fide intention can be ascribed to the assessee. 5. Facts in Brief:– The assessee is a Company engaged in financial activities. The assessee, on 30/09/2013, filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring total loss

VANDANIYA LAXMIBAI KELAR SMRUTI PRATISHTHAN,CHANDAPUR vs. ITO WARD-3,EXMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section (5) of I.T. Act on 14.02.2024. 2) That, the Hon'ble CIT Exemption has rejected the application vide order dtd. 05/08/2024. The trust filed an appeal against the said order before the Hon'ble ITAT, Nagpur on 22/12/2024 and thus there is a delay of about 77 days in filing the said appeal. 3) That, the delay in filing