BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

1 result for “charitable trust”+ Section 69Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi63Jaipur34Mumbai34Bangalore20Chennai19Ahmedabad16Allahabad10Chandigarh9Kolkata6Amritsar6Nagpur6Indore3Hyderabad3Agra2Patna2Varanasi2Visakhapatnam1Pune1Rajkot1Surat1Lucknow1Cochin1

Key Topics

Section 69A3Section 143(3)2Section 143(1)(a)2

VIDYA VIKAS PRATISHTAN,SOLAPUR vs. DCIT, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

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

ITA 902/PUN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.902/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23 Vidya Vikas Pratishtan, Vs. Assessment Unit, 72/2B, Pratap Nagar, Income Tax Department. Soregaon, Solapur- 413004. Pan : Aaatv8537F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Piyush Bafna Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 18.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.12.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2022-23. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Duly Supported By An Affidavit That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Piyush BafnaFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)
Section 69A

69A is factually incorrect, legally unsustainable, and deserves to be deleted in full. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and without prejudice to any other grounds, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in summarily upholding the assessment of total income at Rs.12,51,04,112/- merely by observing that