GOURISH GOPINATH DESAI ,KARWAR vs. ITO -2, KARWAR , UTTARA KANNADA DISTRICT

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos. 284,285 & 286/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2014-15 ) Gourish Gopinath Desai, Vs Ito-Ward-2, Katgal Kumta, Aayakar Bhavan, . Uttar Kannada-581444, Karwar-581301, Karnataka. Karnataka. Pan No:Bfwpd9695E

147 r.w.s144 and u/sec 250 of the Act (ii) u/sec271(1)(c) and u/se c250 of the Act and (iii) u/sec271B and u/sec250 of the Act for the A.Y.2014-15. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) in not condoning the delay in filling the appeal before the CIT(A). 2. Since

GOURISH GOPINATH DESAI,UTTAR KANNADA vs. ITO -2, KARWAR, KARWAR

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos. 284,285 & 286/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2014-15 ) Gourish Gopinath Desai, Vs Ito-Ward-2, Katgal Kumta, Aayakar Bhavan, . Uttar Kannada-581444, Karwar-581301, Karnataka. Karnataka. Pan No:Bfwpd9695E

147 r.w.s144 and u/sec 250 of the Act (ii) u/sec271(1)(c) and u/se c250 of the Act and (iii) u/sec271B and u/sec250 of the Act for the A.Y.2014-15. The assesse has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order of the CIT(A) in not condoning the delay in filling the appeal before the CIT(A). 2. Since

FAROOK SHAIKH,NORTH GOA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), NORTH GOA

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos. 406/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2016-17) Farook Shaikh, National Faceless Vs H.No.961, Assessment Centre, . Near Syndicate Bank, New Delhi-110003. Sanquelim, North Goa-403505, Goa. Pan.No.Fstps6016N (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Sanket Bakshi.Ar Revenue By Smt.Rijula Uniyal.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 03.02.2026 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Appeal Is Filed By The Assesse Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Delhi / Cit(A) Passed U/Sec147 R,W,S144 & U/Sec 250 Of The Act. The Assesse Has Raised The Grounds Of Appeal Challenging The Order Of The Cit(A) In Not Condoning The Delay In Filling The Appeal & Sustaining The Addition Of Unexplained Investment U/Sec69 Of The Act By The Assessing Officer. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Assessee Is In Employment Outside India & Has Not Filed The Return Of Income. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Based On The Information From Ddit(Inv) Bangalore In Respect Of Search

condoning the delay in filling the appeal and sustaining the addition of unexplained investment u/sec69 of the Act by the Assessing Officer. 2. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is in employment outside India and has not filed the return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) based on the information from DDIT(Inv) Bangalore in respect

SUNIL HANAMANT NAIKWAD,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, BELAGAVI

The appeal is ALLOWED as above

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2012-13 Sunil Hanmantsa Naikwad 1156, Saraf Galli, Shahapur, Belgaum Pan:Abeph0397N . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Belgaum. . . . . . . . Respondent

condone the delay and advanced for adjudication. Succinctly stated the facts of the case are that; the 3. assessee is an individual, who did not file his return of income u/s 139 of the Act. Upon receipt of information that the assessee entered into share transactions on Multi-Commodity Exchange [for short ‘MCX’] of ₹1933.72Lakhs, the case

BHARAT HANCHINALE,CHIKODI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPPANI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos. 219/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2020-21) Bharat Hanchinale, Vs National Faceless 1081,Hanabar Galli, Assessment Centre, . Khadaklat, Chikodi, New Delhi-110003. Belgaum-591228. Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Aojph8149C (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

section 69A of the Act and made addition of unexplained credits of Rs.7,64,055/- and assessed the total income of Rs.8,89,915/- and passed the order u/sec 147 r.w.s144 of the Act dated 23.01.2025. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the CIT(A),whereas the CIT(A) find that there

SUJATA SOUHARDHA PATTINA SAHAKARI NIYAMITA,ANKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2, KARWAR

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 067/Pan/2025 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sujatha Souhardha Pattina Sahakari Niyamita At.: Balale, Post.:Madangeri, Tal.:Ankola, Dist.: Uttara Kannada. Pan : Aafas2907J . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Karwar . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr Varun Bhat [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Smt Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 05/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 06/05/2025 Order

147 of the Act anent to assessment year 2013-14 [‘AY’]. ITAT-Panaji Page 1 of 4 Sujatha Souhardha Pattina Sahakari Niyamita Vs ITO ITA Nos.067/PAN/2025 AY: 2013-14 2. The present appeal is time barred by 146 days. The appellant’s application for condonation of former delay is supported by an affidavit dt. 24/03/2025 whereby reasons in not filing

COFRE DO FUNDO DA CRUZ ALO DE BAMBOLIM,BAMBOLIM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, , DELHI

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

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.305/Pan/2024 (A.Y. 2015-16 ) Cofre Do Fundo Da Cruz Alo Vs National E – De Bombolim, Assessment Centre, . 101/1,Holy Cross Shrine, Delhi-110001 Bambolim, Gmc Complex, . Bambolim-403202, Goa. Pan .No. Aabtc0675N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Smt.Pratibha.R. Ar Revenue By Shri.Deshmukh S Prakashsr.Dr

147 r.w.s144 r.w.s144B and u/sec 250 of the Act. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR brought to the knowledge of the bench, that there is a delay in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed the affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the 2 ITA. No.305/PAN/2024 Cofre do fundo da cruz

SHRI SHRADHA CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI NIYMIT NIPANI,NIPANI vs. ITO, WARD-2 BELGAUM , BELGAUM

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT LTD BHOJ,BHOJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIPANI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANAJI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANAJI, GOA

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

VPK URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY,MARDOL, PONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT, NEAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

SHIVAGIRI CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3), BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

AKSHAYA CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,KARWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), KARWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), PANAJI, AYAKAR BHAWAN vs. VPK URBAN COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY , VPK BHAWAN

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

BASAV SOUHARDA CREDIT SAHAKARI NIYAMIT BAILHONGAL,BAILHONGALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER NATIONAL E ASSESSMENT CENTER, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

SHREE MAHILA CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,BELAGAVI vs. ITO WARD 1 BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members

AKSHAYA CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,KARWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), KARWAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed and twenty eight appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purpose in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

condone the delay and admit these appeals. 3. The assessee’s have raised common grounds in respective appeals challenging the order of the CIT(A) for sustaining the denial of claim u/sec80P of the Act based on the following disputed issues have arised are summarized as under: (i).Where the Cooperative credit society deals with the three class of members