SHREE BHASKARACHARYA PRATISHTHAN,CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR vs. LD. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

condone the delay. The Court considering an\napplication under section 5 of the Limitation Act may also look\ninto the prima facie merits of an appeal. A liberal approach may\n5\nChate Tutorials Pvt. Ltd.and\nShree Bhaskaracharya Pratishthan\nbe adopted when some plausible cause for delay is shown.\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State

KOLHAPUR ZILLA KRISHI KARMACHARI SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 2(1) , KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

penalty for under reporting of income u/s 270A of the Act @ 50% of tax payable on the amount of under reported income amounting to Rs.5,72,116/- vide his order dated 15.09.2021. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The appeal was filed with a delay of 223 days. The assessee filed an application for condonation

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal

SOPAN GAHINAJI LANKE,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC-GHAZIABAD, GHAZIABAD

The appeals of the assessee are dismissed

penalty of Rs. 56,800/- for delay of 568 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for first quarter and Rs. 47,600/- for delay of 476 days @ Rs. 100/- per day for second quarter. Aggrieved with these orders, the assessee filed appeals before the ld. CIT(A). Sopan G. Lanke group 4. We observe that on perusal