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 ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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 ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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 ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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 ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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 ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

GENDER LAB FOUNDATION,THANE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.193/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :- Gender Lab Foundation, The Commissioner Of Flat No.2203-4, A Wing, Vs Income Tax, Tribeca Building, Hiranandani Exemption, Pune. Estate, G B Road, Chitalsar Manpada, B.O., Thane. Maharashtra – 400607. Pan: Aajcg4122B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 29/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 30/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Under Section 80G Of The Act, Dated 15.12.2023. The Ld.Cit(E) Dismissed The Application Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Application Is Time Barred. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground(S) Of Appeal : “1. The Cit E, Failed To Appreciate That The Appellant, Gender Lab Gender Lab Foundation [A]

delay is condoned. Findings &Analysis : 3. The ld.CIT(E) rejected the application of the assessee on the ground that assessee filed the application for 80G beyond the time mentioned in section 80G(5) of the Act. According to the ld.CIT(E), assessee’s activity had commenced on 01.04.2022. The assessee should have filed application for 80G within six months

BALU VITHAL PAWALE,PUNE vs. ITO WD- 2(4), PUNE

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2869/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Balu Vithal Pawale, V Assessing Officer, Village-Kasarsai, S National Faceless Taluka-Mulsi, Assessment Centre, Dist-Pune – 410506. Delhi Pan:Bfcpp7170L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B.S.Rajpurohit Revenue By Shri Madhukar Anand-Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 08/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 14/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2017-18 Dated 16.10.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 147R.W.S 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 27.03.2022. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

condoned. Findings & Analysis : 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee as assessee failed to file any reply to notices issued by ld.CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) has not adjudicated the grounds raised by the 2 ITA No.2869/PUN/2025 [A] Assessee.Ld.AR submitted that one more opportunity

VALLABHDAS VALJI JILHA VACHANALAYA,JALGAON vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION - PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकरअपीलसं. / Ita No.1423/Pun/2023 िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year :- Vallabhdas Valjijilha The Commissioner Of Vachanalaya, Vs Income Tax- 227, Navi Peth, Jalgaon, Exemption, Pune. Jalgaon – 425001. Pan: Aabtv0802C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By None. Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari – Dr Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 18/04/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is Assessee’S Appeal Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Pune Under Section 80G Of The Act, Dated 26.10.2023. The Ld.Cit(E) Dismissed The Application Of The Assessee On The Ground That The Application Is Time Barred. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Ground(S) Of Appeal : “1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, Thecommissioner Of Income-Tax (Exemption) Pune Has Erred In Rejecting The Application In Form 10Ab Under Section 80G(5) Of The Vallabhdas Valji Jilha Vachanalaya [A]

delay is condoned. Findings & Analysis : 3. In this case, the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Exemption) has rejected the application of the assessee dated 24/05/2023 filed in Form 10AB for approval u/s 80G of the Act, only on one ground that the application is not maintainable as the assessee failed to file the present application within the time limit allowed under

DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, SANGLI CIRCLE,, SANGLI vs. ANAND DEVELOPERS, SANGLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

131 of the Act to one Mr. Sachin Abhaykumar Oswal, partner of M/s Prarthana Infra and Shri Vihang Shah and Shri Anand Shah, all the three persons were stated to be present before C.O. No.15/PUN/2023 the Assessing Officer on 29.12.2016. When the Assessing Officer had confronted the ledger account of land purchase in the books of account, partner

ANAND DEVELOPERS,SANGLI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), SANGLI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

131 of the Act to one Mr. Sachin Abhaykumar Oswal, partner of M/s Prarthana Infra and Shri Vihang Shah and Shri Anand Shah, all the three persons were stated to be present before C.O. No.15/PUN/2023 the Assessing Officer on 29.12.2016. When the Assessing Officer had confronted the ledger account of land purchase in the books of account, partner

DILIP JAWAHARLAL VARYANI,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE-8, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकरअपऩलसं. / Ita No.643/Pun/2025 निर्धारणवषा / Assessment Year:2011-12 Dilip Jawaharlal Varyani, V The Dy.Commissioner Of S.No.9/2B, Cts No.905, S Income Tax, Circle-8, Vaibhav Vihar, Near Vikram Pune. Vihar, Pimpri, Pune – 411017. Pan: Acapv0521H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sarad Vaze, Ca – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde, Irs–Dr Date Of Hearing 12/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Delhi Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 19.06.2024 For The A.Y.2011-12 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(3)Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 26.03.2014. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

condone the Delay in filing appeal before this Tribunal. Ground No.2 : 7. The Ground No.2 is reproduced here as under : “2. On the basis of facts and circumstances of the case and as per law, the Commissioner of Income Tax. (A) NFAC Delhi, is not justified in confirming the addition solely on account of non-submission necessary information / documents during

JASMINE ZUBIN SHROFF,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2380/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mrs.Jasmine Zubin Shroff V The Income Tax (Through Legal Heir Zubin K S Officer, Shroff), Ward-7(1), Pune. 826/C No.5, Anklesharia Blocks, Dastur Meher Road, Camp, Pune - 411001. Pan:Basps7144E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B C Malakar Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe - Jcit Date Of Hearing 08/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Legal Heir Of Late Jasmine Z. Shroff Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2012-13 Dated 19.12.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The

condone the delay of 593 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. Submission of ld.DR : 4. Ld.Departmental Representative(ld.DR) for Revenue relied on the order of Assessing Officer and ld.CIT(A). Ld.DR filed copy of the reasons recorded by ITO for reopening. Findings and Analysis: 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case

SANKET INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, JALNA

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

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1958/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Sanket Industries Limited, Vs. The Income Tax Flat No.101, Bhoomi Apartment, Officer, Ward-2, 1St Floor, Nutan Laxmi Chs, Plot Jalna. No.9, Jvpd Scheme, Ville Parle (W), N.S. Road, No.8, Mumbai – 400056 Pan: Aafcs6118M Appellant Respondent Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S.P. Walimbe Date Of Hearing 15-02-2022 Date Of Pronouncement 11-03-2022 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am : This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1[Ld.Cit(A)], Aurangabad Order Dated 27.03.2017 For Assessment Year 2012-13. The History Of Notices By Itat Issued For Hearing In This Case Is As Under: Date Of Hearing Present / Absent 03.04.2020 None Present On Behalf Of Appellant 15.12.2021 None Present On Behalf Of Appellant 08.02.2022 None Present On Behalf Of Appellant 15.02.2022 None Present For The Appellant

condone the delay and proceed to hear the appeal on merits. 9. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under : 4 ITA No.1958/PUN/2017 for A.Y. 2012-13 Sanket Industries Limited 1. The Learned LD.CIT(A) has erred in Disallowing Rent of Rs.3,55,718 incurred for Office situated at Mumbai. 2. The Learned LD.CIT(A) has further erred

SANKET INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,AURANGABAD vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3),, JALNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is Partly Allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1957/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Sanket Industries Limited, Vs. Ito, Ward 1(3), Jalna Flat No.101, Bhoomi Apartment, 1St Floor, Nutan Laxmi Chs, Plot No.9, Jvpd Scheme, Ville Parle (W), N.S. Road, No.8, Mumbai – 400056 Pan: Aafcs6118M Appellant Respondent

condone the delay and proceed to hear the appeal on merits. 10. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under : 1. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in disallowing Rent of Rs.39,12,898/- incurred for Office situated at Mumbai. 2. The Learned CIT(A) has further erred in disallowing advertisement expenses of Rs.38

RAMA DAMU BHAGAT,PANVEL vs. ITO WARD-1, PANVEL

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2109/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Rama Damu Bhagat, V The Income Tax Officer, Room No.4, Yashoganga S Ward-1, Panvel. Chg, Tilak Road, Panvel – 410206. Maharashtra. Pan: Bicpb8875P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ca Ajinkya Vaishampayan(Virtual Hearing) Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe – Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 08/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal(Nfac) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2013-14 Dated 25.09.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 144 R.W.S 147 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 14.11.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :

condone the unintentional delay of 22 months in filing the appeal in light of the facts undertaken in the affidavit enclosed and admit the same for disposal on merits. 2) The Ld. and Hon'ble CIT(A)-NFAC erred in dismissing, by not admitting, the appeal for non-fulfillment of condition prescribed u/s 249(4)(b) for payment of advance

ARTH FOUNDATION,NASHIK vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2258/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2026-27 Arth Foundation, V Commissioner Of Income Flat No.3, Tulip Apartment, S Tax (Exemption), Pune. Suyojit Garden, Gangapur Road, Nashik – 422013. Pan: Aahta2324C Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ca Trishala R Jain (Virtual) Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 21/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 29/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Exemption), Passed Under Section 80G Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 01.08.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : ―1. The Learned Cit(E), Pune Has Erred In Rejecting The 1 Application Of The Appellant Trust Filed U/S 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Act Without Considering The Merits Of The Case.

condoned in the interest of justice. 4. The Learned CIT(E), Pune, failed to consider the documents and photographs submitted by the Appellant as evidence of genuine charitable activities. 5. The appellant craves leave to add/ alter/ amend any of the grounds of appeal.‖ Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case

SMT ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

delay in filing of these appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication. 3. First we take up IT(SS)A No.39/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue and ITA No.607/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2019-20. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of carrying

SMT ASHA BHAGWANRAO KADAM,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, AURANGABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue as well as the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandrait(Ss)A Nos.39 & 40/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2019-20

delay in filing of these appeals is condoned and the appeals are admitted for adjudication. 3. First we take up IT(SS)A No.39/PUN/2024 filed by the Revenue and ITA No.607/PUN/2025 filed by the assessee for assessment year 2019-20. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual engaged in the business of carrying