SHAILA OMPRAKASH JETHALE,PUNE vs. CIT(A), NFAC, DELHI

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1364 & 1365/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

condoning the delay and also disposed of the appeals by not recording appropriate finding as per the law. Even though the appeals are ex-parte, assessments are ex-parte the Ld. CIT(A) has to dispose cases by passing speaking order. The comparison of both the orders of Ld. CIT(A) indicates that findings are recorded devoid of merits

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

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

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

SURESH DATTATRAY GURAV,BAVDHAN PUNE vs. ITO WARD 13(2), PUNE

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2172/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Suresh Dattatray Gurav, V The Income Tax Officer, Flat No.5, Mangesh Garden, S Ward-2(3), Nashik. Bavdhan Khurd, Mulshi, Pune – 411021. Pan: Aaypg3217D Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Harshal Nasikkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Ratnakar Shelake – Add.Jcit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 02/01/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/01/2025 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(Appeals)[Nfac] Passed Under

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for Assessment Year 2015-16; dated 23.11.2021. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in rejecting the request for condonation of delay made by the appellant in the appropriate

DNYANESHWAR EKANATH BALWADKAR,PUNE vs. ITO WD- 2(2) PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19 Dnyaneshwar Ekanath Balwadkar Ito, Ward 2(2), Pune Vs. Balewadi Haveli, Pune – 411045 Pan: Athpb4978N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S Pathak Department By : Shri A D Kulkarni Date Of Hearing : 26-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-11-2025 O R D E R Per R.K. Panda, Vp:

section 147 of the Act after taking approval of the competent authority and notice u/s 148 was issued and served on the assessee. Since the assessee did not comply to the various statutory notices issued by the Assessing Officer, therefore, the Assessing Officer in the order passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred

OM J J SWA VISHWASHANTI DHAM NIRMAN SANSTHA,VERUL vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, AURANGABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose

Delay in condoned.\nSubmission of ld.AR :\n3. Ld.AR for the Assessee submitted that Assessee Trust had\nfiled Return of Income for A.Y.2015-16 declaring income at\nRs.NIL. The Centralized Processing Centre(CPC) passed an order\nu/s.143(1) of the Act, assessing total income at Rs.45,02,150/-.\nAssessee filed an appeal before the ld.CIT(A). Ld.CIT(A) dismissed\nthe appeal

SUYASH SOLUTIONS PVT.LTD,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE-5, PUNE

Accordingly, the Appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.576/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Suyash Solutions Pvt. Ltd., V The Dy.Cit, S.No.145, Pune Saswad Road, S. Circle-5, Pune. Opp,.Navalakha Godown, Phursungi, Pune – 412308. Maharashtra. Pan: Aajcs7144M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Mihir C Naniwadekar & Shri B.D.Bhide – Ar’S Revenue By Shri Akhilesh Srivastva– Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Addl./Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)-1, Gurugram Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2010-11, Dated 22.01.2025 Emanating From Assessment Order U/S.143(1) Of The I.T.Act, Dated 23.02.2011. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal :

section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for A.Y.2010-11, dated 22.01.2025 emanating from Assessment Order u/s.143(1) of the I.T.Act, dated 23.02.2011. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal : ITA No.576/PUN/2025 [A] “Being aggrieved by an order passed by the ld.CIT(A)-NFAC (hereinafter referred for short as the „ld.CIT(A)‟) U/sec.250 dated 22.01.2025, your appellant submits following

KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT P LTD (PUNE MUMBAI REALTY P LTD MERGED WITH RIVER VIEW PROPERTIES PVT.LTD. MERGED WITH KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT P LTD),PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1323 & 357/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Kumar Urban Development Vs. Dcit, Circle-4, Pune. Pvt. Ltd., (Pune Mumbai Reality Private Limited Merged With River View Properties Pvt. Ltd. & River View Properties Pvt. Ltd. Merged With Kumar Urban Development Pvt. Ltd.) 10Th Floor, Kumar Business Center, Cts No.29, Bund Garden Road, Pune-411001. Pan : Aadcp8622M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri B. Koteswararao Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Different Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 & 3, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.05.2017 & 08.11.2017 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal In Ita No.1323/Pun/2018 For A.Y. 2012-13 For Adjudication.

section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. It held that in every case of delay there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned, but that alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him; and if the explanation does

KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT P LTD (PUNE MUMBAI REALTY P LTD MERGED WITH RIVER VIEW PROPERTIES PVT. LTD MERGED WITH KUMAR URBAN DEVELOPMENT P LTD), ,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1323 & 357/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Kumar Urban Development Vs. Dcit, Circle-4, Pune. Pvt. Ltd., (Pune Mumbai Reality Private Limited Merged With River View Properties Pvt. Ltd. & River View Properties Pvt. Ltd. Merged With Kumar Urban Development Pvt. Ltd.) 10Th Floor, Kumar Business Center, Cts No.29, Bund Garden Road, Pune-411001. Pan : Aadcp8622M Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil Pathak Revenue By : Shri B. Koteswararao Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Different Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2 & 3, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 15.05.2017 & 08.11.2017 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal In Ita No.1323/Pun/2018 For A.Y. 2012-13 For Adjudication.

section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice. It held that in every case of delay there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned, but that alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him; and if the explanation does

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

condoned the delay considering that the delay was not inordinate and it was owing to the severe illness of the Chartered Accountant of the assessee who was handling the case of the assessee as stated in the affidavit of the assessee. So far as, the merits of the case is concerned, we find that the impugned issue is squarely covered

SUDHAKAR BAJIRAO SHISODE,NASHIK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NASHIK

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2780/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

150 declared in the return filed for A.Y. 2018-19. Subsequently, based on the information received from Risk Management Strategy, the reassessment proceedings in the case of assessee were carried out. Certain details were submitted by the assessee during the course of reassessment proceedings. However, ld. Assessing Officer concluded the proceedings disallowing the claim of deduction u/s.80C

TEJASHREE ATUL PATIL,PUNE vs. PR.CIT - 2, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

delay of 237 days is condoned in light of judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court 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 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). 3. Brief facts of the case

KHARADI JAIN SAMAJ TRUST,PUNE vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS, PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

delay which we have condoned and proceeded to decide the appeal on merits. 4. Brief facts are that on receipt of assessee’s application in Form No. 10AB under clause (iii) of section 12(1)(ac) of the Act the Ld. CIT(E) issued notice through ITBA portal on 18.08.2023 requiring the assessee to upload certain information/clarification as enumerated

GOLDEN CHARITABLE TRUST,SANGLI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.933/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :- Golden Charitable Trust, The Cit Exemption, 2349, Guruwar Peth, Miraj, V Pune. Maharashtra – 416410. S Pan: Aactg0998H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Keyur Patel – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 24/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 12/04/2024 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(Exemption), Pune Under Section 12Ab Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Passed On 30.06.2023.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Learned Cit (Exemption) Has Erred In Fact & In Law In Rejecting The Application For The Registration Of The Trust U/S. 12A(1) (Ac) Despite The Fact That Appellant Trust Is Engaged In Pursuing Purely Charitable Objects Such As Providing Medical & Educational Aid To Needy Beneficiaries & The Trust Activities Are Genuine & There Is No Contrary Finding To It. Thus The Rejection Order Is Patently Illegal & Golden Charitable Trust [A]

delay could have been condoned by CIT ( exemption) asper provisions of section 119(2)(b). 5. Learned CIT (Exemption) has erred in fact in law in passing rejection order for Registration u/s. 12(A) (1) (ac) despite the fact that, there is no violation of any of the provisions of Income Tax Act and the trust is pursuing charitable objects

SHRI UPASANI KANYAKUMARI SANSTHAN,RAHATA vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), NASHIK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

150/-. Details called for in the notice u/s.142(1) of the Act were examined by the ld. Assessing Officer including the source of cash deposit, time deposit, investment in mutual funds, interest income other 2 Shri Upasani Kanyakumari Sansthan than interest on securities u/s.194A. After being satisfied with the details filed by the assessee, ld. AO concluded the assessment accepting