EVEREST EDUCATION SOCIETY, AURANGABAD ,AURANGABAD vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE, EXEMTION CIRCLE, AURANGABAD, AURANGABAD

Appeal of the assessee is DISMISSED and the appeal of the Revenue is ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1919/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Aurangabad . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Everest Education Society, C/O. Seema Nursing Home, Roshan Gate, Aurangabad – 431 001 Pan : Aaate2231P . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent

condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. c. Every day's delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. d

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE ,, AURANGABAD vs. M/S. EVEREST EDUCATION SOCIETY,, AURANGABAD

Appeal of the assessee is DISMISSED and the appeal of the Revenue is ALLOWED

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.1919/Pun/2017 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Exemption Circle, Aurangabad . . . . . . . अपऩलधथी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Everest Education Society, C/O. Seema Nursing Home, Roshan Gate, Aurangabad – 431 001 Pan : Aaate2231P . . . . . . . प्रत्यथी / Respondent

condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. c. Every day's delay must be explained does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. d

KULDEEP MAKHIJA,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD 10(3), PUNE, PUNE

The appeal is DISMISSED with aforestated cost

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri G. D. Padmahshali & Hon’Ble Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2012-13 Kuldeep Makhija C/O Ghanshyam Shivnani, P/4-903, Oxford Village Premiums, Kedari Nagar, Pune-411040 Pan: Alnpm7224Q. . . . . . . . Appellant

section 253 of the Act, every appeal u/s 253(1) or 253(2) of the Act is required to be filed within sixty days from the date on which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the assessee. The present appeal is admittedly filed with delay of 402 days as endorsed by the Registry as against

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad relating to assessment years 2003-04 to 2005-06 respectively. Since ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad relating to assessment years 2003-04 to 2005-06 respectively. Since ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad relating to assessment years 2003-04 to 2005-06 respectively. Since ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad relating to assessment years 2003-04 to 2005-06 respectively. Since ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad relating to assessment years 2003-04 to 2005-06 respectively. Since ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore

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

D E R PER R.K. PANDA, V.P: The above appeals filed by the Revenue and the assessee are cross appeals and are directed against the separate orders dated 21.12.2015 of the Ld. CIT(A)-2, Aurangabad relating to assessment years 2003-04 to 2005-06 respectively. Since ITA Nos.1153, 1155 & 1154/MUM/2016 common issues are involved in all these appeals, therefore

RAVINANDA LANDMARKS,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARED-5(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

D-38, Vastushree Complex, Pune Hyde Park, Market Yard, Pune 411 037 Maharashtra PAN : AAOFR1700Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 12.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 13.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned four appeals pertaining to the Assessment Years

RAVINANDA LANDMARKS,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

D-38, Vastushree Complex, Pune Hyde Park, Market Yard, Pune 411 037 Maharashtra PAN : AAOFR1700Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 12.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 13.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned four appeals pertaining to the Assessment Years

RAVINANDA LANDMARKS UNIT 3,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-5(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

D-38, Vastushree Complex, Pune Hyde Park, Market Yard, Pune 411 037 Maharashtra PAN : AAOFR1700Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 12.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 13.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned four appeals pertaining to the Assessment Years

RAVINANDA LANDMARKS,PUNE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-5(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandra

D-38, Vastushree Complex, Pune Hyde Park, Market Yard, Pune 411 037 Maharashtra PAN : AAOFR1700Q Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Revenue by : Shri Arvind Desai Date of hearing : 12.02.2025 Date of pronouncement : 13.02.2025 आदेश / ORDER PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : The captioned four appeals pertaining to the Assessment Years

SHRI NARAYANA GURUDEVA TRUST,NASHIK vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E), PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1520 & 1521/Pun/2024 Shri Narayan Gurudeva Trust Pakhal Road, Vadala, Nashik-422001 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Aafts0349M

253 of the Act. The said delay therefore is condoned and advanced accordingly. 4. Without touching merits of these cases, we have heard rival parties’ common submissions on limited issue of rejection in limine; and subject to rule 18 of ITAT Rules, 1963 perused material placed on record and thoughtfully considered the rival reliance. 5. We note that, the appellant

SHRI NARAYANA GURUDEVA TRUST,NASHIK vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

Bench: Hon’Ble Smt Astha Chandra & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1520 & 1521/Pun/2024 Shri Narayan Gurudeva Trust Pakhal Road, Vadala, Nashik-422001 .......अपीलार्थी / Appellant Pan: Aafts0349M

253 of the Act. The said delay therefore is condoned and advanced accordingly. 4. Without touching merits of these cases, we have heard rival parties’ common submissions on limited issue of rejection in limine; and subject to rule 18 of ITAT Rules, 1963 perused material placed on record and thoughtfully considered the rival reliance. 5. We note that, the appellant

ANAND BHALCHANDRA KULKARNI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. PRICIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are rejected as unadmitted being non-maintainable

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi () Ita Nos. 1352 To 1357/Pun/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2022-23 Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni, Pr. Cit, Pune-1, G/701 Tulip Afnhb Camp Pmt Building, Swargate, Jalvvayu Vishar Phase-1, Plot-20, Vs. Pune-411037. Sec 20, Kharghar-410210. Pan No. Aanpk 7550 Q Appellant Respondent

condoning the delay in filing revised returns on the ground of no evidences submitted by the assessee in support of claim of disability element. Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni way of raising grounds as reproduced above. 5. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. At the outset, we find

ANAND BHALCHANDRA KULKARNI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are rejected as unadmitted being non-maintainable

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi () Ita Nos. 1352 To 1357/Pun/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2022-23 Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni, Pr. Cit, Pune-1, G/701 Tulip Afnhb Camp Pmt Building, Swargate, Jalvvayu Vishar Phase-1, Plot-20, Vs. Pune-411037. Sec 20, Kharghar-410210. Pan No. Aanpk 7550 Q Appellant Respondent

condoning the delay in filing revised returns on the ground of no evidences submitted by the assessee in support of claim of disability element. Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni way of raising grounds as reproduced above. 5. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. At the outset, we find

ANAND BHALCHANDRA KULKARNI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are rejected as unadmitted being non-maintainable

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi () Ita Nos. 1352 To 1357/Pun/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2022-23 Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni, Pr. Cit, Pune-1, G/701 Tulip Afnhb Camp Pmt Building, Swargate, Jalvvayu Vishar Phase-1, Plot-20, Vs. Pune-411037. Sec 20, Kharghar-410210. Pan No. Aanpk 7550 Q Appellant Respondent

condoning the delay in filing revised returns on the ground of no evidences submitted by the assessee in support of claim of disability element. Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni way of raising grounds as reproduced above. 5. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. At the outset, we find

ANAND BHALCHANDRA KULKARNI,NAVI MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE-1, PUNE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are rejected as unadmitted being non-maintainable

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi () Ita Nos. 1352 To 1357/Pun/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 To 2022-23 Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni, Pr. Cit, Pune-1, G/701 Tulip Afnhb Camp Pmt Building, Swargate, Jalvvayu Vishar Phase-1, Plot-20, Vs. Pune-411037. Sec 20, Kharghar-410210. Pan No. Aanpk 7550 Q Appellant Respondent

condoning the delay in filing revised returns on the ground of no evidences submitted by the assessee in support of claim of disability element. Anand Bhalchandra Kulkarni way of raising grounds as reproduced above. 5. We have heard rival submission of the parties on the issue in dispute and perused the relevant material on record. At the outset, we find