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

condonation of delay in case where the delay was beyond the control of the assessee. 39. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act on 22.12.2011 pursuant to the specific directions

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

condonation of delay in case where the delay was beyond the control of the assessee. 39. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act on 22.12.2011 pursuant to the specific directions

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

condonation of delay in case where the delay was beyond the control of the assessee. 39. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act on 22.12.2011 pursuant to the specific directions

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

condonation of delay in case where the delay was beyond the control of the assessee. 39. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act on 22.12.2011 pursuant to the specific directions

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

condonation of delay in case where the delay was beyond the control of the assessee. 39. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. We find the Assessing Officer in the instant case passed the order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act on 22.12.2011 pursuant to the specific directions

BLUE RIDGE UNIT B TOWER 9 TO 14,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(4),PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2385, 2386 & 2387/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Blue Ridge Unit B Tower 9 Vs The Income Tax Officer, To 14 Co-Operative Housiong Ward-2(4), Pune. Society Ltd., Unit B Society Office, Rajiv Gandhi It Park, Phase I, Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057. Maharashtra. Pan: Aacab2693P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms.Ayesha Ansari & Shri Sandesh Ps – Ar’S Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Through Virtual Hearing) Date Of Hearing 01/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 All Dated 26.08.2024 Emanating From The Separate Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S

condonation petition without giving due weight to the genuine reasons for delay, which warranted indulgence in the interest of justice. 1.3 BECAUSE such approach disregarded the orders of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 03.03.2025 and the consequential order giving effect thereto dated 20.05.2025, which had already upheld the assessee's entitlement to Section 80P deduction

BLUE RIDGE UNIT B TOWER 9 TO 14,PUNE vs. ITO, WARD-2(4),PUNE, PUNE

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita Nos.2385, 2386 & 2387/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 Blue Ridge Unit B Tower 9 Vs The Income Tax Officer, To 14 Co-Operative Housiong Ward-2(4), Pune. Society Ltd., Unit B Society Office, Rajiv Gandhi It Park, Phase I, Hinjewadi, Pune – 411057. Maharashtra. Pan: Aacab2693P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms.Ayesha Ansari & Shri Sandesh Ps – Ar’S Revenue By Shri Harish Bist – Addl.Cit(Through Virtual Hearing) Date Of Hearing 01/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Bunch Of Three Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18 All Dated 26.08.2024 Emanating From The Separate Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 147 R.W.S

condonation petition without giving due weight to the genuine reasons for delay, which warranted indulgence in the interest of justice. 1.3 BECAUSE such approach disregarded the orders of the CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi dated 03.03.2025 and the consequential order giving effect thereto dated 20.05.2025, which had already upheld the assessee's entitlement to Section 80P deduction

M/S. BILCARE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

condone the delay of 79 days. 29. The issue raised by the assessee company in the present appeal is regarding the quantum of TP adjustments made in respect of corporate guarantee. The assessee company took a plea that the transactions of providing guarantees by the assessee company to its C.O. No.14/PUN/2021 subsidiary is in the nature of shareholders activity

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), PUNE vs. M/S. BILCARE LIMITED, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

condone the delay of 79 days. 29. The issue raised by the assessee company in the present appeal is regarding the quantum of TP adjustments made in respect of corporate guarantee. The assessee company took a plea that the transactions of providing guarantees by the assessee company to its C.O. No.14/PUN/2021 subsidiary is in the nature of shareholders activity

D.Y. PATIL EDUCATION SOCIETY vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX,,

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकरअपऩलसं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2016 निर्धारणवषा / Assessment Year: N.A. D.Y.Patil Education Society, V The Commissioner Of 2126, „E‟ Tarabai Park, S Income Tax(Central), Kolhapur – 416003. Pune. Pan: Aaatd8919M Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta, Dharmesh Shah & S R Kabra – Cas Revenue By Shri Amol Khairnar – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 04/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 01/12/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax(Central), Pune Under Section 12Aa R.W.S 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 24.02.2016. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(Central) In Deciding The Issue Of Registration Of The Education Society Under 5. 12Aa Of The Act Vide His Order Dt. 24-02-2016 Erred In

condoning delay in making application for registration u/s.12A of the Act. 3. The Ld.CIT has erred in not appreciating that non-consideration of the application for registration u/s.12A within the time prescribed u/s.12AA(2) of the Act would result into deemed registration to the appellant. 4. The Ld.CIT has erred in deciding the issue of registration u/s.12AA

PASHANKAR AUTO WORKS PVT. LTD.,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(5), PUNE, PUNE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.420/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2014-15 Pashankar Auto Works Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward-4(5), S.No.45/1, Dehu Road, Pune Katraj-Bypass, Baner, Pune 411 015, Maharashtra Pan : Aaecp8466C Appellant Respondent

Section 254(2) of the Act, can lead to several absurd and anomalous situations. An order passed without the knowledge of the aggrieved party, would render the remedy against the order meaningless as the same would be lost by limitation while the person aggrieved would not even know that an order has been passed. Such an interpretation would

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AURANGABAD vs. VISTA NIRMAN PVT. LTD., MUMBAI

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2011-12

delay in filing of the CO is condoned and the CO is admitted for adjudication. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a private company, engaged in the business of trading in shares and securities. It filed its return of income on 23.12.2011 declaring total loss of Rs.26,873/-. The assessment was completed

PARMESHWAR PARAM SEVA FOUNDATION,NASHIK vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PUNE

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

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

condone the delay in filing of the appeal and proceed to decide the appeal. 3 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed an application for registration in Form No. 10AB u/s 80G(5)(iii) of the Act on 21.04.2023 along with annexures. The Ld. CIT(E) pursuant to the said application called for certain

KAI KASHINATH POSATE BAHUUDDESHIYA SEVABHAVI SANSTHA UDGIR,UDGIR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.938/Pun/2023

3 notice. It is, therefore, prayed for remand of the matter to the CIT, Exemption condoning the delay. 4. On the other hand, the ld. CIT-DR vehemently opposed for remand of the matter to the CIT (Exemption) and condonation of delay placing reliance of the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court in Basawaraj & Another Vs. The Spl. Land Acquisition

SHAKUNTALA DNYANDEV SALUNKHE,MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD -1, ICHALKARANJI, MAHARASTHRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2844 & 2847/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2016-17

3. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual who did not file return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. Based on the information available in NMS data that the assessee has deposited huge cash with various banks aggregating to Rs.10.21 crore, notice u/s.148

SHAKUNTALA DNYANDEV SALUNKHE,MAHARASTHRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1 , ICHALKARANJI, MAHARASTHRA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2844 & 2847/Pun/2024 Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2016-17

3. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual who did not file return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. Based on the information available in NMS data that the assessee has deposited huge cash with various banks aggregating to Rs.10.21 crore, notice u/s.148

SAHAKAR BHUSHAN VASANT SARVA SEVA SAHAKARI SOCIETY LTD,SANGLI vs. ITO WARD-1, SANGLI, SANGLI

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.350/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2022-23 Sahakar Bhushan Vasant Sarva Vs. Income Tax Officer, Seva Sahakari Society Ltd., Ward-1, Sangli Shinde Chowk, Mhaisal, Vijay Nagar, Mhaisal S.O., Sangli – 416409, Maharashtra Pan : Aaaav2175L Appellant Respondent

254/- has been denied on account of delay in filing the return of income and invoked section 80AC of the Act. Assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay u/s.119(2)(b) of the Act and the same is still pending before the income-tax authorities. Letter dated 14.11.2026 issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Sangli asking

SHREE BHOGAWATI SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD,KOLHAPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KOLHAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.2194 To 2198/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 To 2014-15 Shree Bhogawati Sahakari Vs. Acit, Circle-1, Sakhar Karkhana Ltd., Kolhapur. Shahunagar Parite, Sugar Factory, Shahunagar Parite, Tal- Karveer, Kolhapur- 416211. Pan : Aaaas3731R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nikhil S. Pathak Revenue By : Shri Amit Bobde Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.12.2025 आदेश / Order Per Bench : These Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Dated 26.06.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Years 2010-11 To 2014-15 Respectively. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeals. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Application For Condonation Of Delay Duly Supported By An Affidavit That The Appeals Within The Prescribed Time Limit. After Hearing Ld. Dr, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeals. 3. Since Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In All The Above Captioned Five Appeals Of The Assessee, Therefore, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 4. First, We Shall Take Up The Appeal Of The Assessee In Ita No.2194/Pun/2024 For A.Y. 2010-11 For Adjudication As The Lead Case.

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeals. 3. Since identical facts and common issues are involved in all the above captioned five appeals of the assessee, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order. 4. First, we shall take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No.2194/PUN/2024 for A.Y. 2010-11 for adjudication