ROHINI MARUTI DESHMUKH,PUNE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 6(2), PUNE

In the result, all the appeals (ITA Nos

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

condone the delay of 1918 days in filing of each of the instant appeals before this Tribunal and admit these appeals for adjudication. 3 ITA.Nos.1837-1839/PUN./2025 (Amol Vasant Deshmukh & Ors.) 3. From perusal of the grounds of appeal, we notice that common grievance of the assessees is against the levy of penalty u/s.271

RAJENDRA MITHAILAL AGARWAL,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, NASHIK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

276C for the above years, I came to know that matters of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) have been decided against me by CIT(A). That I thereafter applied for certified copy of the Order on 4. 13.11.2017 which were provided to me. Thereafter I sought proper advise and have filed appeal before Hon Tribunal. 5. That the delay

RAJENDRA MITHAILAL AGARWAL,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, NASHIK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

276C for the above years, I came to know that matters of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) have been decided against me by CIT(A). That I thereafter applied for certified copy of the Order on 4. 13.11.2017 which were provided to me. Thereafter I sought proper advise and have filed appeal before Hon Tribunal. 5. That the delay

RAJENDRA MITHAILAL AGARWAL,,NASHIK vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1),, NASHIK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

276C for the above years, I came to know that matters of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) have been decided against me by CIT(A). That I thereafter applied for certified copy of the Order on 4. 13.11.2017 which were provided to me. Thereafter I sought proper advise and have filed appeal before Hon Tribunal. 5. That the delay