SHEETAL SANDEEP MEHER,JALGAON vs. ITO, WARD1(2), , JALGAON

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

Bench: Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1000/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Sheetal Sandeep Meher, Vs. Ito, Ward-1(2), 3Rd Floor, Pitruchaya Jalgaon. Building, Nehru Chowk, Navi Peth, Jalgaon- 425001. Pan : Aqupm5982D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanket Joshi Revenue By : Shri Umashankar Prasad Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.02.2024 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Present Appeal Is Filed Belatedly I.E. With The Delay Of 13 Days. The Appellant Furnished An Affidavit Praying For Condonation Of Delay In The Circumstances Mentioned Therein.

delay of 13 days is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 4. The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal on an ex- parte basis without issuing the notice of hearing dated 19.02.2024 on the official email id reflected on income tax portal as well as Form

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JALGOAN vs. SUNIL RAMNARAYAN MANTRI, JALGAON

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

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

condone the said delay. 5. Briefly stated the assessee is an individual. For the AY 2016-17, he filed his return of income on 16.10.2016 declaring total income of Rs.1,57,63,230/-. The case was selected for complete scrutiny under 3 ITA No.269/PUN/2024 & CO No. 15/PUN/2024, AY 2016-17 CASS and the Ld. Assessing Officer (“AO”) completed the assessment

SHRI MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

Penny Stocks.\nNowhere, the report talks about the issue of unsecured loans on account of which\n25\nITA No.1178/PUN/2023\nITA No.2017/PUN/2024\nadditions in the year under consideration are made in the present case. Hence, it\ncannot be said that the AO was in possession of tangible material to have reason\nto believe that the income has escaped the assessment

MANOJ MADANLAL CHHAJED,PUNE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE

Penny Stocks.\nNowhere, the report talks about the issue of unsecured loans on account of which\n25\nITA No.1178/PUN/2023\nITA No.2017/PUN/2024\nadditions in the year under consideration are made in the present case. Hence, it\ncannot be said that the AO was in possession of tangible material to have reason\nto believe that the income has escaped the assessment