FATIMABAI HAJIMIYA KOKANI PVT TRUST.,NASHIK vs. ITO (EXEP) WARD 1, NASHIK

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2373/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2015-16

section 5 of the Limitation Act may also look into the prima facie merits of an appeal. A liberal approach, may adopted when some plausible cause for delay is shown. Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Inder Singh 3 Fatimabai Hajimiya Kokani Pvt. Trust Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382) condoned delay

KISAN SEVA SHIKSHAN SANSTHA,BUBNAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD KOLHAPUR , KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2802/Pun/2024 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17

Section 144 was neither willful nor deliberate but was due to the aforesaid genuine and unavoidable reasons. The delay in filing this appeal is of 180 days, calculated from 21.01.2019 to 20.07.2019.” 4.1 The above stated reasons for condoning the delay were not found to be satisfactory by the Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. He therefore rejected the condonation request

ULKA MADHUKAR SHINDE,PANVEL vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurposes

condone the delay in filing of the appeal and\nadmit the same for adjudication.\n3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :\n“1.\nThe Ld AO relied on the information of AIR regarding cash deposit of\nRs.11,00,000/- in ShyamraoVithal Co-op Bank Ltd. Mumbai, but has\nno tangible reliable material of the same

CHANDAN HASSANAND LOKWANI,NASHIK vs. ACIT CIRCLE 1 , NASHIK

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

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1358/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Chandan Hassanand Lokwani, V The Assistant 2 Jawahar Market, Nashik Road, S Commissioner Of Maharashtra – 422101. Income Tax, Circle-1, Pan : Abcpl7072N Nashik. Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Sanket M Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde - Dr Date Of Hearing 23/10/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23/10/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act 1961, Dated 18.05.2024. 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 108 Days In Filing The Appeal Without Appreciating That The Said Delay Was Due To Reasonable Cause & The Said Delay Ought To Have Been Condoned In The Interest Of Justice. 2) The Learned Cit(A) Failed To Appreciate That In This Case, The Disallowance U/S 40(A)(Ia) Was Made By The A.O. Towards Non Deduction Of Tds On Interest Paid To Three Nbfc In Spite Of The Fact That The Appellant Had Furnished Ca Certificate In Form 26A To Prove That The Payees Had Offered The Interest To Tax & Paid Taxes Thereon & Hence, The Said Addition Resulted Into Double Taxation Of The Same Income & Therefore, The Impugned Delay Of 108 Days In Filing Appeal Ought To Have Been Condoned In View Of The Ratio Laid Down By Hon'Ble Madras High Court In Case Of Venkatadri Traders Ltd. V. Cit [248 Itr 681].

section 250 of the Income tax Act 1961, dated 18.05.2024. 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 108 days in filing the appeal without appreciating that the said delay was due to reasonable cause and the said delay ought

SHREE AMBIKA GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA MARYADIT,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 10(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1329/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shree Ambika Gramin V The Income Tax Officer, Bigarsheti Sahakri Patsanstha S Ward-10(1), Pune. Maryadit, Khodad, Junnar, Pune – 410504. Pan: Aadas2545Q Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Kishor B Phadke – Ar Revenue By Shri Ramnath P Murkunde – Dr Date Of Hearing 19/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 04/03/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Manish Borad, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac] For Assessment Year 2021-22 Dated 08.03.2024 Passed U/Sec.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 1.1 Registry Informed That There Is A Delay 35 Days. We Have Carefully Gone Through The Affidavit & Notice That On Account Of

condoned the delay in filing the appeal as the delay was due to genuine hardship faced by the appellant. 3. The Learned IT authorities erred in law and on facts in issuance of intimation order u/s 143(1) of ITA, 1961 without adhering to the requisite procedures of issuance of proposed adjustment

KOYANA MADHYAVARTI DUGHALAY SEVAK SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT KARAD,SATARA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SATARA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2774/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19

248 days are further added to the delay in filing appeal before CIT(A). The total delay therefore is 507 days. 7. The above period of delay was occurred to alternate remedy u/s 154 being pursued by the Society. It is submitted that the delay is for reasons beyond the control of the Society and there was no intention

SAMEER ASHOK JOSHI,,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 1,, NASHIK

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.572/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sameer Ashok Joshi, Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Raghukul Building, Nashik. Pimpalgaon (B), Tal. Niphad, Dist.- Nashik – 422209. Pan : Acxpj6376R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanket M. Joshi Revenue By : Shri M. J. Jasnani Date Of Hearing : 17.01.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.01.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Nashik [‘Cit(A)’ For Short] Dated 21.10.2016 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. There Is Delay Of 445 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. Before Us, The Ld. Ar Submitted That The Delay Had Occurred On Account Of Wrong Advice Given By Income Tax

248 ITR 681 (Mad.) 3. On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR opposed the condonation of delay. 3 4. We heard the rival submissions and perused the averments made in the affidavit. The averments made in the affidavit were not controverted by the ld. CIT-DR. Therefore, we satisfied that the delay in filing the present appeal was occurred

AFSHA SHAMIM AHMED KHAN ,NASHIK vs. THE ITO WARD-1(3), NASHIK

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

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2858/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2010-11 Afsha Shamim Ahmed Khan, V The Income Tax Officer, 11, Paradise Plaza, Opposite S Ward-1(3), Nashik. Alone Point, Hotel Shingada Talao, Nashik – 422001. Pan: Azmpk3812B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Pramod Shingte Revenue By Shri Madhukar Anand – Jcit(Through Virtual) Date Of Hearing 07/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 08/01/2026 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.2010-11 Dated 20.03.2025 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The Act, Dated 11.12.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :

delay is condoned. Findings & Analysis : 2. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, Assessee had not filed Return of Income for A.Y.200-11. Assessing Officer(AO) passed an order u/s.144 r.w.s 147 of the Act for A.Y.2010-11 on 11.12.2017. The relevant paragraph 6 of the Assessment Order is reproduced here as under : “6. During

LATE PRATAPSINGH KARTARSINGH WALIA REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAR HEIR MRS. AMARJEETKAUR PRATAPSINGH WALIA ,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(4), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

condone the delay in both the appeals and proceed to decide the appeals. ITA No. 752/PUN/2024 for AY 2013-14 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned AO and the CIT(A) was not justified in making / upholding addition of Rs.1

LATE PRATAPSINGH KARTARSINGH WALIA REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAR HEIR MRS. AMARJEETKAUR PRATAPSINGH WALIA,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(4), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

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

condone the delay in both the appeals and proceed to decide the appeals. ITA No. 752/PUN/2024 for AY 2013-14 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned AO and the CIT(A) was not justified in making / upholding addition of Rs.1

PARRY PHYTOREMEDIES PRIVATE LIMITED, (E.I.D. PARRY INDIA LIMITED),,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED in aforestated terms

Bench: Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.20/Pun/2019 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Parry Phytoremedies Private Limited (Now Known As E.I.D. Parry (India) Limited) S.No.73/2, Shivane Industrial Estate, Warje, Nda Rd, Nr Agarwal Godown, Pune – 411023 Pan: Aaccp9589J . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle – 4, Pune . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent द्वारा / Appearances Assessee By : Shri S. A. Gundecha Revenue By : Shri M. G. Jasnani सपिवधई की तधरऩख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 03/11/2022 घोर्णध की तधरऩख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10/11/2022 आदेश / Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; This Appeal Challenges The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Pune [For Short “Cit(A)”] Dt. 01/02/2018 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which Ascended Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 24/02/2016 Passed U/S 143(3) By The Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle 4, Pune [For Short “Ao”] For Assessment Year [For Short “Ay”] 2013-14. Itat-Pune Page 1 Of 17

delay stands condoned in the larger interest of justice. 9. In coming to sole and substantive ground, it evidently transpired that; 9.1 The appellant undisputedly is engaged in the business of extraction of lycopene from the imported tomato paste as its raw material, and such extraction is either sold in domestic market as such or exported through its sister concern

VIJAY SHAMBHULING POPADE,LATUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 , LATUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed being time barred

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1197/Pun/2025 धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Vs Ito, Ward-1, Vijay Shambhuling Popade, Latur Popade Niwas, Pathak Galli, Latur-413512 Maharashtra Pan-Bkppp0696D Appellant Respondent

248/- deposited in the saving account held with M/s Shri Renuka Multi State Urban Co-operative Society Ltd. 4. Considering all these facts I am of the considered view that assessee seems to be not interested in persuing its appeal and has also not filed any application for condonation of delay nor has filed any written submission in support

JEWEL HOUSING,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2018-19

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business as builders and filed its return of income on 15.10.2018 declaring total income of Rs.29,84,930/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

section 201(1A) of Rs. 42,248/-. F] Findings & Decision:- Grounds No. 1 to 3:- As all the Three Grounds are related to one another, the three grounds are adjudicated together. The submission of the Appellant has been carefully perused. I find that the proceedings u/s 201 was initiated for A Y 2015-16. Proceeding under each

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

section 201(1A) of Rs. 42,248/-. F] Findings & Decision:- Grounds No. 1 to 3:- As all the Three Grounds are related to one another, the three grounds are adjudicated together. The submission of the Appellant has been carefully perused. I find that the proceedings u/s 201 was initiated for A Y 2015-16. Proceeding under each

PUDHARI PUBLICATIONS PVT.LTD.,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), KOLHAPUR

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1394 To 1396/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Pudhari Publications Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito (Tds), Kolhapur. 2318 C-Ward, Bhausingji Road, Pudhari Bhawan Karveer, Kolhapur- 416002. Pan : Aadcp2453Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None (Written Submission) Revenue By : Shri Arvind Desai Date Of Hearing : 10.10.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.11.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: The Above Captioned Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Addl./Jcit(A)-4, Kolkata Dated 02.05.2024 For The Assessment Years 2015-16, 2017-18 & 2018-19 Respectively. 2. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Three Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.1394/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2015-16 For Adjudication.

section 201(1A) of Rs. 42,248/-. F] Findings & Decision:- Grounds No. 1 to 3:- As all the Three Grounds are related to one another, the three grounds are adjudicated together. The submission of the Appellant has been carefully perused. I find that the proceedings u/s 201 was initiated for A Y 2015-16. Proceeding under each

PRAVIN JOSHI,,DEHRADUM vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER -11 (4),, PUNE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.487/Pun/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19

248 011, Ward-11(4), Uttarakhand Pune PAN : AAYPJ2157K Appellant Respondent Assessee by None Revenue by Shri M.G. Jasnani Date of hearing 23-06-2022 Date of pronouncement 23-06-2022 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 16-07-2021 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi

PUNE MATHADI HAMAL AND OTHER MANUAL WORKERS BOARD,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1012/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Pune Mathadihamal & Other The Income Tax Manual Workers Board, V Officer, Shramashakti Bhavan, S Ward-5(1), Pune. Coomercial Plot No.1, Market Yard, Pune – 411037. Pan: Aaalp0097L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Vipul Joshi – Ar Revenue By Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari & Shri Rajesh Gawali– Dr’S Date Of Hearing 17/04/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 27/06/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Orders Of Ld.Commissionerof Income Tax(Appeals)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Act Dated 14.07.2023 :

248 the respondent's appeal was allowed. 6. Mr. Mohanty, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue urges that the decision of the Apex Court in Radhasoami Satsang (supra) would have no application to the facts of the present case for two reasons viz. (a) that the decision itself states that it is restricted to the facts of the case before

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE -6,, PUNE vs. M/S. SION PANVEL TOLLWAYS PVT.LTD,, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed and

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

delay is condoned by virtue of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 438 ITR 296 (SC) read with judgment in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re 432 ITR 206 (SC) dated 08-03-2021 and 421 ITR 314 and the instant cross objections are admitted for disposal on merits