MATSYODARI SHIKSHAN SANSTHAS ANKUSHRAO TOPE JUNIOR COLLEGE, JALNA,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, AURANGABAD

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

10. Section 3(1) of the Limitation Act, for the sake of convenience, is reproduced hereinbelow: “3. Bar of limitation.- (1) Subject to the provisions contained in sections 4 to 24 (inclusive), every suit instituted, appeal preferred, and application made after the prescribed period shall be dismissed, although limitation has not been set up as a defence.” 11. Though Section

MATSYODARI SHIKSHAN SANSTHAS ANKUSHRAO TOPE COLLEGE, JALNA,JALNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, AURANGABAD

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

10. Section 3(1) of the Limitation Act, for the sake of convenience, is reproduced hereinbelow: “3. Bar of limitation.- (1) Subject to the provisions contained in sections 4 to 24 (inclusive), every suit instituted, appeal preferred, and application made after the prescribed period shall be dismissed, although limitation has not been set up as a defence.” 11. Though Section

APAASSO MALI,PUNE vs. ITO 11(1), SWARGATE

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

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

13 Mad. 269, "s. 5 gives the Court a discretion which in respect of jurisdiction is to be exercised in the way in which judicial power and discretion ought to be exercised upon principles which are well understood, the words sufficient 5 ITA No.1110/PUN/2025, AY 2018-19 cause' receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice when

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

13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor’s report could only be furnished upto the stage ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 of framing of assessment as the power to condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter

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

13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor’s report could only be furnished upto the stage ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 of framing of assessment as the power to condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter

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

13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor’s report could only be furnished upto the stage ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 of framing of assessment as the power to condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter

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

13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor’s report could only be furnished upto the stage ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 of framing of assessment as the power to condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter

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

13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor’s report could only be furnished upto the stage ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 of framing of assessment as the power to condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter

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

13. Counsel appearing for the Revenue then argued that as per this circular, the auditor’s report could only be furnished upto the stage ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 of framing of assessment as the power to condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter

VIRENDRA SINGH SAINI,HARYANA vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE, BENGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1483/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

13. The ld. AR referred to section 5 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936, to contend that deduction made from an employee’s salary for the month of October should suffer disallowance only if it is not paid by 15th December. This argument was premised on the language of section 5, which says that the wages of every person

PRASANNA SADASHIV SHETE,PUNE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-10, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13 Prasanna Sadashiv Shete Dcit, Circle 10, Pune 56/8, D-Ii, Midc Shete Industries, Vs. Chinchwad, Pune – 411019 Pan: Adbps4462Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Department By : Shri Arvind Desai, Addl Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 27-03-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-05-2025 O R D E R

section 27(3) of the Act is barred by limitation, it deserves to be rejected on this ground alone.” In Madhu Dadha vs. The Assistant Commissioner, Hon'ble Madras High Court in their decision dated 23.6.2009 in TC (A). No. 421 of 2009 while referring to the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in P.K. RAMACHANDRAN v. 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

13,018/-. The assessee was asked to furnish the explanation with reasoned facts, however, the assessee failed to furnish any explanation thereof. Consequently, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 15.03.2021 disallowing the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act. The penalty proceedings u/s 270A of the Act was initiated simultaneously for under

DNYANESHWAR SHINDE,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1) , AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

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

13,002/- u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act vide his order dated 06.03.2024 by making an addition of Rs.52,052/- on account of variation in respect of issue of exemption u/s 10(10B) of the Act and Rs.5,00,000/- on account of variation in respect of issue of exemption u/s 10(10)(iii) of the Act by holding

DECCAN GYMKHANA,PUNE vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 10(23C) of the Act, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to condone the delay. However, this Court is inclined to give appropriate direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application as an application for the subsequent assessment year, namely, 2013-2014 in accordance with law. Such direction is issued considering the peculiar

DECCAN GYMKHANA,DECCAN vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

section 10(23C) of the Act, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to condone the delay. However, this Court is inclined to give appropriate direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application as an application for the subsequent assessment year, namely, 2013-2014 in accordance with law. Such direction is issued considering the peculiar

ARUN AASHRAY ,PUNE vs. CIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraarun Aashray The Cit (Exemption), 1541 Clover Highlands, Near Pune Vs. Nibm, Pisoli Road, Kondhwa, Pune – 411048 Pan: Aacta2725Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Mutha Department By : Shri Prashant Gadekar Date Of Hearing : 15-04-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2025 O R D E R

section 10(23C) of the Act, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to condone the delay. However, this Court is inclined to give appropriate direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application as an application for the subsequent assessment year, namely, 2013-2014 in accordance with law. Such direction is issued considering the peculiar

SMT. MANGLA RAMNIWAS MANDHANI ABMM AWAS YOJNA FOUNDATION,JALNA vs. CIT ( EXEMPTION ), EXEMPTION

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.236/Pun/2024 (E-Appeal)

10. Division Bench of the Hon’ble Patna High Court has held that Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act will apply to appeals and applications filed under a special law only where the scheme of the special law does not exclude its application. Neither the provision of Section 5 nor that of Section 12(2) of the Limitation

KALYAN CHARITY TRUST,PUNE vs. CIT (EXEMP), PUNE

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

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

section 10(23C) of the Act, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to condone the delay. However, this Court is inclined to give appropriate direction to the respondent to consider the petitioner's application as an application for the subsequent assessment year, namely, 2013-2014 in accordance with law. Such direction is issued considering the peculiar