HUTATMA JAIWANTRAO PATIL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL & JUNIOR COLLEGE HIMAYATNAGAR,HIMAYAT NAGAR vs. CIT TDS NASHIK, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

section 246A, since the direction given in Para No 6 of Form No 7 for such arrangement. Due to this anomaly in service of notice, the assessee could not file the appeal within the scheduled time; hence delay in submission is to be condoned

HUTATMA JAIWANTRAO PATIL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL & JUNIOR COLLEGE HIMAYATNAGAR,HIMAYAT NAGAR vs. CIT TDS NASHIK, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

section 246A, since the direction given in Para No 6 of Form No 7 for such arrangement. Due to this anomaly in service of notice, the assessee could not file the appeal within the scheduled time; hence delay in submission is to be condoned

HUTATMA JAIWANTRAO PATIL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL & JUNIOR COLLEGE HIMAYATNAGAR,HIMAYATNAGAR NANDED vs. ITO TDS, NANDED

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

section 246A, since the direction given in Para No 6 of Form No 7 for such arrangement. Due to this anomaly in service of notice, the assessee could not file the appeal within the scheduled time; hence delay in submission is to be condoned

HUTATMA JAIWANTRAO PATIL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL & JUNIOR COLLEGE HIMAYATNAGAR,HIMAYAT NAGAR NANDED vs. ITO TDS, NANDED

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

section 246A, since the direction given in Para No 6 of Form No 7 for such arrangement. Due to this anomaly in service of notice, the assessee could not file the appeal within the scheduled time; hence delay in submission is to be condoned

HUTATMA JAIWANTRAO PATIL GIRLS HIGH SCHOOL & JUNIOR COLLEGE HIMAYATNAGAR,HIMAYAT NAGAR vs. CIT TDS NASHIK, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoresl.

section 246A, since the direction given in Para No 6 of Form No 7 for such arrangement. Due to this anomaly in service of notice, the assessee could not file the appeal within the scheduled time; hence delay in submission is to be condoned

KEDAR ASSOCIATES ,PUNE vs. TDS WARD 2 , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1530 To 1533/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Kedar Associates, Vs. Ito, Tds Ward-2, Pune. 105A Narayan Peth Off Lakmi Road, Pune- 411030. Pan : Aabfk6598A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Vaze Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 13.04.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. At The Outset, We Find That There Is Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals. Ld. Ar Furnished An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons Of Delay In Filing Of These Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Duly Supported By An Affidavit. Ld. Dr Raised No Serious Objection Against The Delay Condonation Request Made By The Assessee. Accordingly, The Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals Is Condoned & The Appeals Are Admitted For Adjudication. 4. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1530/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 (Quarter 2) For Adjudication.

condoned the delay. Now it is the submission of the assessee that in 2024 the copy of intimation/order has been obtained and produced before the Bench which may kindly be considered. But at the same time we also find that in first appeal memo Form 35 the assessee himself mentioned the fact about filing of rectification letter on 12.07.2017 against

KEDAR ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. TDS WARD 2 PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1530 To 1533/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Kedar Associates, Vs. Ito, Tds Ward-2, Pune. 105A Narayan Peth Off Lakmi Road, Pune- 411030. Pan : Aabfk6598A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Vaze Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 13.04.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. At The Outset, We Find That There Is Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals. Ld. Ar Furnished An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons Of Delay In Filing Of These Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Duly Supported By An Affidavit. Ld. Dr Raised No Serious Objection Against The Delay Condonation Request Made By The Assessee. Accordingly, The Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals Is Condoned & The Appeals Are Admitted For Adjudication. 4. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1530/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 (Quarter 2) For Adjudication.

condoned the delay. Now it is the submission of the assessee that in 2024 the copy of intimation/order has been obtained and produced before the Bench which may kindly be considered. But at the same time we also find that in first appeal memo Form 35 the assessee himself mentioned the fact about filing of rectification letter on 12.07.2017 against

KEDAR ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. TDS WARD 2, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1530 To 1533/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Kedar Associates, Vs. Ito, Tds Ward-2, Pune. 105A Narayan Peth Off Lakmi Road, Pune- 411030. Pan : Aabfk6598A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Vaze Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 13.04.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. At The Outset, We Find That There Is Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals. Ld. Ar Furnished An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons Of Delay In Filing Of These Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Duly Supported By An Affidavit. Ld. Dr Raised No Serious Objection Against The Delay Condonation Request Made By The Assessee. Accordingly, The Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals Is Condoned & The Appeals Are Admitted For Adjudication. 4. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1530/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 (Quarter 2) For Adjudication.

condoned the delay. Now it is the submission of the assessee that in 2024 the copy of intimation/order has been obtained and produced before the Bench which may kindly be considered. But at the same time we also find that in first appeal memo Form 35 the assessee himself mentioned the fact about filing of rectification letter on 12.07.2017 against

KEDAR ASSOCIATES,PUNE vs. TDS WARD 2 , PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1530 To 1533/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Kedar Associates, Vs. Ito, Tds Ward-2, Pune. 105A Narayan Peth Off Lakmi Road, Pune- 411030. Pan : Aabfk6598A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sharad A. Vaze Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Four Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 13.04.2023 For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Four Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. At The Outset, We Find That There Is Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals. Ld. Ar Furnished An Affidavit Explaining The Reasons Of Delay In Filing Of These Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Duly Supported By An Affidavit. Ld. Dr Raised No Serious Objection Against The Delay Condonation Request Made By The Assessee. Accordingly, The Delay Of 400 Days In Filing Of These Appeals Is Condoned & The Appeals Are Admitted For Adjudication. 4. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1530/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2013-14 (Quarter 2) For Adjudication.

condoned the delay. Now it is the submission of the assessee that in 2024 the copy of intimation/order has been obtained and produced before the Bench which may kindly be considered. But at the same time we also find that in first appeal memo Form 35 the assessee himself mentioned the fact about filing of rectification letter on 12.07.2017 against

SHAHBAZ MOHAMMED SHAFEEQUE,MALEGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, MALEGAON

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

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2291/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shahbaz Mohammed V The Income Tax Officer, Shafeeque, S. Ward-1, Malegaon. House No.904, Lane No.2, Malegaon City S.O., Malegaon, Nashik, Malegaon – 423203. Maharashtra. Pan: Cfppm6844A Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket Joshi (Virtual) Revenue By Smt Saumya Pandey Jain-Addl.Cit Date Of Hearing 20/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 20/11/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: In This Case, Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commisioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16 Dated 28.02.2025. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

condoned if the appellant has a just cause on merits. 2 ITA No.2291/PUN/2025 [A] 8] 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. Ld.AR appeared virtually and submitted that ld.CIT(A) has not decided the legal grounds and hence 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

B. C. BIYANI PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,,BHUSAWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1655 To 1665/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

condone the delay in A.Y: 2013-14 to 2016-17 B.C. Biyani Projects P.Ltd., late filing the income tax returns or that no appeal is provided from arbitrary order passed under section 234E of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court held that the right to appeal was not a matter of right but was creature of statute

B.C. BIYANI PROJECTS PVT.LTD,,BHUSAWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC- (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1655 To 1665/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

condone the delay in A.Y: 2013-14 to 2016-17 B.C. Biyani Projects P.Ltd., late filing the income tax returns or that no appeal is provided from arbitrary order passed under section 234E of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court held that the right to appeal was not a matter of right but was creature of statute

B. C. BIYANI PROJECTS PVT.LTD,,BHUSAWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC- (TDS), , GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1655 To 1665/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

condone the delay in A.Y: 2013-14 to 2016-17 B.C. Biyani Projects P.Ltd., late filing the income tax returns or that no appeal is provided from arbitrary order passed under section 234E of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court held that the right to appeal was not a matter of right but was creature of statute

B. C. BIYANI PROJECTS PVT.LTD,,BHUSAWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS), , GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1655 To 1665/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

condone the delay in A.Y: 2013-14 to 2016-17 B.C. Biyani Projects P.Ltd., late filing the income tax returns or that no appeal is provided from arbitrary order passed under section 234E of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court held that the right to appeal was not a matter of right but was creature of statute

B.C. BIYANI PROJECTS PVT.LTD,,BHUSAWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1655 To 1665/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

condone the delay in A.Y: 2013-14 to 2016-17 B.C. Biyani Projects P.Ltd., late filing the income tax returns or that no appeal is provided from arbitrary order passed under section 234E of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court held that the right to appeal was not a matter of right but was creature of statute

B.C. BIYANI PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,,BHUSAWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC- (TDS),, GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1655 To 1665/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

condone the delay in A.Y: 2013-14 to 2016-17 B.C. Biyani Projects P.Ltd., late filing the income tax returns or that no appeal is provided from arbitrary order passed under section 234E of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court held that the right to appeal was not a matter of right but was creature of statute

B.C. BIYANI PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,,BHUSAWAL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CPC (TDS), , GHAZIABAD

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.1655 To 1665/Pun/2019 ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 To 2016-17

condone the delay in A.Y: 2013-14 to 2016-17 B.C. Biyani Projects P.Ltd., late filing the income tax returns or that no appeal is provided from arbitrary order passed under section 234E of the Act. The Hon‟ble High Court held that the right to appeal was not a matter of right but was creature of statute