BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

70 results for “condonation of delay”+ Short Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai416Chennai341Kolkata217Delhi153Ahmedabad145Hyderabad123Jaipur118Bangalore112Karnataka103Chandigarh85Pune70Surat50Calcutta46Nagpur35Panaji35Indore30Visakhapatnam24Lucknow24Raipur22Rajkot19Agra13Cuttack11Ranchi9Cochin9SC9Amritsar7Jodhpur6Patna6Guwahati6Jabalpur5Varanasi5Dehradun3Allahabad3Telangana2Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income52Section 143(3)47Section 80I28Capital Gains26Section 25025Section 14724Section 14824Deduction24Long Term Capital Gains

CHANDRASHEKHAR BAGADE,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 5(1), PUNE

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

ITA 958/PUN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2013-14 Chandrashekhar Bagade Ito, Ward 5(1), Pune F 5, Windmill Village, Vs. Opp Ambrosiya, Paud Road, Pune – 411021 Pan: Amxpb8229M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sharad A Vaze Department By : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 30-07-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 31-07-2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A VazeFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 54Section 54F

short term capital gain and as a consequence exemption u/s 54/54F was rejected. 4. Thereupon, I filed second appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Hon'ble Tribunal held in its order dt 25/06/2018 that the capital gains is long term capital gains. However, it set aside the issue of exemption u/s 54F to CIT(A) for re-adjudication

Showing 1–20 of 70 · Page 1 of 4

17
Short Term Capital Gains17
Section 50C16
Section 54B15

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

ITA 334/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

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

ITA 273/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta
Section 92C

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

NILESH RAJENDRA JADHAV,SATARA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, SATARA

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

ITA 149/PUN/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: S/Shri Prateek Jha & Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

delay of 703 days are condoned. 5. The ld. AR submits that the assessee is not interested to prosecute ground No. 1. Hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 6. Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee challenging the action of CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.14,54,317/- on account of short term capital gain

SHILPA VITTHAL JADHAV,SATARA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD -2, SATARA

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

ITA 148/PUN/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Aug 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: S/Shri Prateek Jha & Prayag JhaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147

delay of 703 days are condoned. 5. The ld. AR submits that the assessee is not interested to prosecute ground No. 1. Hence, the same is dismissed as not pressed. 6. Ground No. 2 raised by the assessee challenging the action of CIT(A) in confirming the addition of Rs.14,54,317/- on account of short term capital gain

VAISHALI KESHAV KULKARNI,PUNE vs. ITO WARD 13(2), PUNE

In the result the Grounds Numbers 2, 3 and 4 raised by the assessee are allowed

ITA 540/PUN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 May 2025AY 2015-16
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 250

delay is condoned.\nSubmission of ld.AR :\n2.\nLd.AR for the assessee submitted that CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the submission of the assessee. Ld.AR submitted Affidavit of the assessee.\n3\nITA No.540/PUN/2025 [A]\n2.1 Ld.AR pleaded that the Notice u/s.148 dated 13/04/2022 and the order is bad in Law.Ld.AR relied on the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court

RAMSING HIMMATSING RAJPUT,NASHIK vs. ITO, WARD 2(1), NASHIK

ITA 601/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 May 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.601/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Ramsing Himmatsing Vs. Ito, Ward-2(1), Nashik. Rajput, Plot No.17, Usha Bunglow, Near Seven Heven Hotel, Behind Lotus House, Chetna Nagar, Nashik- 422009. Pan : Adrpr2780A Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sanket Joshi Revenue By : Shri Manoj Tripathi Date Of Hearing : 02.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 16.05.2024 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.02.2024 Passed By Ld Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1] The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Confirming The Addition U/S 50C Of Rs. 14,25,000 By Taxing The Difference Between Govt. Valuation Of Rs.22,25,000 & Actual Sale Consideration Of Rs.8,00,000 Without Appreciating That The Impugned Land Located Near River Bank Was Vulnerable To Floods, It Was Situated Near Cremation

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 50C

short term capital gain. 6.1 The AO in the assessment order noted that the assessee had sold an immovable property at Rs. 800000/- whose guideline value was Rs. 2225000/- for the stamp duty purposes. The AO issued the notices but no compliance was made so the AO added the entire stamp duty consideration as the income of the assessee

PRAVIN BABANRAO TAMBE,PUNE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 692/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune11 Mar 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.692/Pun/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Pravin Babanrao Tambe, Vs. Pcit, Pune-4. Sr. No.14, Shree Datta Colony, Akashwani, Hadapsar, Pune- 411028. Pan : Aimpt5087G Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue By : Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari Date Of Hearing : 12.12.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.03.2021 Passed By Ld. Pr.Cit, Pune- 4 [‘Ld. Pcit’] U/S 263 Of The It Act For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. Ld Cit Erred In Law & On Facts In Invoking Jurisdiction Under Section 263 & Setting Aside Assessment Order For Fresh Assessment On The Ground That Assessment Has Been Framed

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar Keshari
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 48

term capital gain of Rs.12,66,673/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 142(1) were also issued 3 and served upon the assessee and the case was represented by Shri Anand Birla CS duly authorized by the assessee and various details called for were furnished. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 on 24.12.2018 by accepting

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 2,, PUNE vs. VILAS DASHRATH BALWADKAR,, PUNE

ITA 824/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Pune House No.329, Near Laxmi Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Prakash Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1116A Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dashrath Kondiba Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Aqapb5784C Appellant Respondent

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153

short „the Act‟. Heard all the assessees through their counsel Shri Deepak Sasar and the departmental represented by Shri M.G. Jasanani/DR. 2. The Revenue appeal ITA No.824/PUN/2019 raises the foregoing substantive grounds: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the reference made

VILAS DASHRATH BALWADKAR,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE -2,, PUNE

ITA 931/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Pune House No.329, Near Laxmi Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Prakash Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1116A Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dashrath Kondiba Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Aqapb5784C Appellant Respondent

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153

short „the Act‟. Heard all the assessees through their counsel Shri Deepak Sasar and the departmental represented by Shri M.G. Jasanani/DR. 2. The Revenue appeal ITA No.824/PUN/2019 raises the foregoing substantive grounds: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the reference made

PRAKASH DASHRATH BALWADKAR,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-2,, PUNE

ITA 932/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Pune House No.329, Near Laxmi Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Prakash Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1116A Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dashrath Kondiba Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Aqapb5784C Appellant Respondent

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153

short „the Act‟. Heard all the assessees through their counsel Shri Deepak Sasar and the departmental represented by Shri M.G. Jasanani/DR. 2. The Revenue appeal ITA No.824/PUN/2019 raises the foregoing substantive grounds: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the reference made

DASHRATH KONDIBA BALWADKAR,,PUNE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE -2,, PUNE

ITA 933/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteनिर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-2, Vs. Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Pune House No.329, Near Laxmi Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Vilas Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1117B Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Prakash Dashrath Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Apppb1116A Appellant Respondent निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Dashrath Kondiba Balwadkar Vs. Acit, House No.329, Near Laxmi Circle-2, Mata Temple, Balewadi, Pune Pune-411045 Pan: Aqapb5784C Appellant Respondent

Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153

short „the Act‟. Heard all the assessees through their counsel Shri Deepak Sasar and the departmental represented by Shri M.G. Jasanani/DR. 2. The Revenue appeal ITA No.824/PUN/2019 raises the foregoing substantive grounds: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding that the reference made

RIMPLE SAXENA,PANVEL vs. ITO WARD 2 , PANVEL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2413/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune21 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2413/Pun/2024 Assessment Year : 2013-14 Rimple Saxena, Vs. Ito, Ward-2, Sai Villa, Plot No.114, Panvel Flat No.102, Sector-I, Vijay Marg, New Panvel – 410 206 Maharashtra Pan : Bdjps3014H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya M. VaishampayanFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 250(6)

condone the delay of 242 days in filing the appeal in the larger interest of justice and proceed for adjudication of appeal on merits. 4. Facts of the case in brief are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed the return of income for the A.Y. 2013-14. Based on the information available with the officer

KISHORE KASHINATH KOLI,PANVEL vs. CIT(A), DELHI

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

ITA 2179/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Mrs. Naina ChaurasiaFor Respondent: Shri Basavaraj Hiremath, Addl.CIT
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69

short term capital gain and Rs.11,27,000/- as unexplained investment u/s 69 of the Act. 4. Since the assessee filed an appeal with a delay of 125 days before the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal by not condoning

MR SANJAY RUPACHAND TATHED,AHMEDNAGAR vs. ITO WARD 2, AHMEDNAGAR

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

ITA 1502/PUN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prasad S. BhandariFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 50C

delay in filing of the appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and has not filed his return of income for the impugned assessment year. Information was received from the ACIT, Ahmednagar that the assessee has sold an immovable property at S.No

SURESH GOYAL,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER WARD 9(3), PUNE

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 26/PUN/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteassessment Year : 2011-12 Suresh Goyal, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Gat No.255, Ward-9(3), Pune Chikhali M. Moshi Road, Boradewadi, Pune – 412 105 Pan : Acupa6602L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh MachileFor Respondent: Shri M. G. Jasnani

short term capital gains are assessable in M/s. Smart Foundry Pvt. Ltd. i.e. his private limited company. 4. Mr. Machile vehemently reiterated above narrated factual position and sought to get the matter remanded to the CIT(A) for the reason that the latter’s order has been passed ex-parte. It, however, emerges from a perusal of paragraphs 1.3 onwards

ADPR & ASSOCIATES,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1), NASHIK

ITA 1884/PUN/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Smt. Payal R. DedhiaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)

condone the said delay and proceed to decide both the appeals. AYs 2021-22 & 2022-23 3. The common issue raised in both these appeals is - whether, in the case of private discretionary trusts whose income is chargeable to tax at the Maximum Marginal Rate (“MMR”), surcharge is chargeable at the highest applicable rate or as per slab rate

ADPR & ASSOCIATES,NASHIK vs. ITO WARD 1(1) , NAHSIK

ITA 1885/PUN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Smt. Payal R. DedhiaFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(1)

condone the said delay and proceed to decide both the appeals. AYs 2021-22 & 2022-23 3. The common issue raised in both these appeals is - whether, in the case of private discretionary trusts whose income is chargeable to tax at the Maximum Marginal Rate (“MMR”), surcharge is chargeable at the highest applicable rate or as per slab rate

MR. ADIT RATHI,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD 13(1), PUNE

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 411/PUN/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Jul 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Hari KrishanFor Respondent: Shri S.P. Walimbe
Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 54B

short term capital asset. 2 Adit Rathi A.Y. 2012-13 (iii) The agricultural land should be used by the individual or HUF for agriculture purpose atleast for a period of 2 years immediately preceding the date of transfer. (iv) Within a period of 2 years from the date of transfer of old land, the taxpayer should acquire another agriculture land

HEMANTKUMAR GAJANAN LAD,KALAMBOLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5, PANVEL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2765/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: PendingITAT Pune04 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2765/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Hemantkumar Gajanan Lad, Vs. Ito, Ward-5, Panvel. 703, Krushidhan Chs, Sector 3, Kalamboli- 410218. Pan : Abjpl6243N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan Revenue By Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde : Date Of Hearing 02.06.2025 : Date Of Pronouncement : 04.06.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 31.07.2024 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. There Is Delay In Filing Of The Present Appeal. We Are Satisfied With The Reasons Mentioned In The Affidavit For Condonation That The Applicant Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause For Not Filing The Appeal Within The Prescribed Time Limit. Ld. Dr Has Not Raised Any Objection To Condone The Delay, Therefore We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Adjudicate The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Ajinkya M. Vaishampayan
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 45(1)

condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal. 2 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual filed his return of income on 31.01.2017 declaring total income of Rs.2,30,840/- for the year under consideration. A notice u/s 148 was issued on 27.03.2017 as it was found that the assessee along with