MAHRATTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INDUSTRIES AND AGRICULTURE,PUNE vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

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

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

condonation of delay, the appellant has cited three reasons for delay filing of appeal (a) non awareness of the assessment proceedings (b) a notice for penalty proceedings was received on 17.05.2023, thereby Income Tax Portal was checked but assessment order was not available (c) the assessment order was uploaded on 28.06.2023. In this case, the assessment proceedings were completed under

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay for 'accepting the auditor's report at a later date has only been given to the Income-tax Officer and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The Central Board of Direct Taxes by issuing the circular dated February 9, 1978, has treated the provisions regarding furnishing of the auditor

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay for 'accepting the auditor's report at a later date has only been given to the Income-tax Officer and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The Central Board of Direct Taxes by issuing the circular dated February 9, 1978, has treated the provisions regarding furnishing of the auditor

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay for 'accepting the auditor's report at a later date has only been given to the Income-tax Officer and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The Central Board of Direct Taxes by issuing the circular dated February 9, 1978, has treated the provisions regarding furnishing of the auditor

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay for 'accepting the auditor's report at a later date has only been given to the Income-tax Officer and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The Central Board of Direct Taxes by issuing the circular dated February 9, 1978, has treated the provisions regarding furnishing of the auditor

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay for 'accepting the auditor's report at a later date has only been given to the Income-tax Officer and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The Central Board of Direct Taxes by issuing the circular dated February 9, 1978, has treated the provisions regarding furnishing of the auditor

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

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

condone the delay for 'accepting the auditor's report at a later date has only been given to the Income-tax Officer and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The Central Board of Direct Taxes by issuing the circular dated February 9, 1978, has treated the provisions regarding furnishing of the auditor

SHUBHSITA FOUNDATION,THANE vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1284 & 1282/Pun/2024

condone the delay of 193 days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals, proceed for adjudication of appeals. ITA No.1284/PUN/2024 : 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a trust, filed application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) for grant of registration u/s.12AB of the Act on 20.06.2023. In order

SHUBHSITA FOUNDATION,THANE vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1284 & 1282/Pun/2024

condone the delay of 193 days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals, proceed for adjudication of appeals. ITA No.1284/PUN/2024 : 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a trust, filed application in Form No.10AB under clause (iii) of section 12A(1)(ac) for grant of registration u/s.12AB of the Act on 20.06.2023. In order

SHRI AKHIL BHARTIYA SAMARTH JAIN SHRAVAK SANGH,NASHIK vs. EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NASHIK, NASHIK

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

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

section 80G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the “Act”). 2. The assessee has filed this appeal with a delay of 432 days. The assessee has filed an application along with a sworn affidavit of the Managing Trustee seeking condonation of delay in filing of the appeal stating therein the reasons for delay as under : “A. Background: 1. The appellant

SHRI SAMARTH JAIN SHRAVAK SANGH TRUST,AURANGABAD vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

In the result, ITA No.1310/PUN/2024 filed by the appellant trust is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1310 & 1309/Pun/2024

condone the delay of 557 days and admit the appeals for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the appeal ITA No.1310/PUN/2024 are that the appellant is a Trust, filed application in Form No.10AB dated 31.03.2022 seeking registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. On receipt of the said application, the ld. CIT (Exemptions), in order to verify the genuineness

SHRI SAMARTH JAIN SHRAVAK SANGH TRUST,AURANGABAD vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE, AURANGABAD

In the result, ITA No.1310/PUN/2024 filed by the appellant trust is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1310 & 1309/Pun/2024

condone the delay of 557 days and admit the appeals for adjudication. 4. Brief facts of the appeal ITA No.1310/PUN/2024 are that the appellant is a Trust, filed application in Form No.10AB dated 31.03.2022 seeking registration u/s.12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act. On receipt of the said application, the ld. CIT (Exemptions), in order to verify the genuineness

LIONS NAB COMMUNITY EYECARE CENTRE, MIRAJ,SANGLI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.257/Pun/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Lions Nab Community Vs. Dcit, Cpc, Bangalore. Eyecare Centre, Plot No.P-39, Midc, Miraj, Sangli- 416410. Pan : Aabfl4373L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 05.03.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.05.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Is Recalled Matter. Vide Order Dated In M.A. No.151/Pun/2023 For The Assessment Year 2011-12 Filed Against The Order Of The Tribunal In Ita No.257/Pun/2022 Dated 06.01.2023 (Appeal Filed By The Assessee) Was Recalled To Adjudicate The Issue De Novo. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Condonation Application Duly

delay not condoned. However, the subsequent act of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC deciding the case on merits upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC, the assessee has filed appeal before this Tribunal. On perusal of the record, it is observed that DCIT(CPC) has not made any disallowance or not added

POONAM RAHUL ANAND,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2147/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Poonam Rahul Anand, V The Income Tax Officer, Anands Plot No.70, S Ward-1(1), Nashik. Niwas River View, Savarkar Nagar, Gangapur Road, Nashik – 422007. Pan: Addpa4704D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Rajesh Gawali – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 16/12/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; Dated 16.07.2024 For The A.Y.2015-16. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Dismissing The Appeal In Limine By Refusing To Condone The Delay Of 224 Days In Filing The Appeal Against The Asst. Order U/S 147 Without Appreciating That The Said Delay Was Due To Reasonable Cause & The Same Ought To Have Been Condoned In The Interest Of Justice.

section 250 of the Act, ld.CIT(A) in Para 1 has mentioned incorrect date i.e.23.03.2023. Thus, the illness of the assessee and date of assessment order coincides. Assessee also filed an Affidavit before us explaining the reason for delay in filling appeal before Ld.CIT(A). 3.2 In these facts and circumstances of the case we are convinced that there

SADULLA SYED NOORSHA SYED,NANDED vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NANDED

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

condone the delay of 355 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication by placing reliance on the judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. reported in (1987) 2 SCC 107 and in the case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated

INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD- 10(1),, AKURDI vs. SHRI SAINATH NAGARI SAHKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT, AMBEGAON

In the result, the grounds raised by the Revenue in ITA No

127 days. The ld. D.R sought condonation of delay in filing these appeals in view of outbreak of Covid 19 at the relevant time. Taking into consideration the outbreak of Covid 19, at the A.Y. 2017-18 relevant time, the said delay is condoned and the instant appeals are admitted for disposal on merits by virtue of judgment

INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(1), AKURDI vs. VASANTRAO NAIK NAGARI SAHKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT, ALEPHATA

In the result, the grounds raised by the Revenue in ITA No

127 days. The ld. D.R sought condonation of delay in filing these appeals in view of outbreak of Covid 19 at the relevant time. Taking into consideration the outbreak of Covid 19, at the A.Y. 2017-18 relevant time, the said delay is condoned and the instant appeals are admitted for disposal on merits by virtue of judgment

ATISH ANANDA BARNE,PUNE vs. PRAVIN AGRAWAL, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

section 56(2)(v) of the Act. 3. Aggrieved assessee preferred appeal before the ld.CIT(A)/NFAC with a delay of 127 days. The ld.CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine without condoning

SANDIPAN BHAGWANRAO JADHAV,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, LATUR

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1247/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sandipan Bhagwanrao Jadhav, V The Income Tax Officer, 1, Padmin, Behind Hanuman S. Ward-1, Latur. Temple, Prakash Nagar, Latur – 413512. Maharashtra. Pan: Abcpj1410E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Shilchandra Hajgude – Ar Revenue By Shri Akhilesh Srivastva– Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/06/2025

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2016-17, dated 15.09.2024 emanating from Assessment Order u/s.147 r.w.s 144B of the Income Tax Act, dated 25.03.2022. ITA No.1247/PUN/2025 [A] Submission of ld.AR : 2. Ld.AR for the Assessee submitted a paper book. At the outset, ld.AR submitted that there is a delay of 180 days in filing appeal before the ITAT