VIRENDRA SINGH SAINI,HARYANA vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE, BENGALORE

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

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1483/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2019-20

delay in the deposit of the employees’ share in the relevant funds, which was in contravention of the prescription of u/s.36(1)(va), the assessee chose not to offer the disallowance in computing the total income in the return, which rightly called for the disallowance in terms of section 143(1)(a) of the Act. 11. The ld. AR vehemently

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

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

disallowed by the AO. This has resulted short computation of capital gain of Rs.34,29,429/-. Apart from this, it was also noticed by Ld. PCIT, that the Assessing Officer has levied interest of Rs.20,644/- only instead of correct amount of interest of Rs.1,59,997/-. Accordingly, 4 there is a short levy of interest of Rs.1

GURU KRIPA SEVA ASHYRAM,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD 1(2), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. The Commissioners will while entertaining such belated applications in filing Form no.108 shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. Further, all such applications shall be disposed off by 30.09.2019.” 9. He submitted that the Circular dated 09.02.1978 still

SAI SAKSHI AUTOMOTIVE LTD,PUNE vs. ITO WARD-6(1), PUNE

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

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2016-17

disallowances, the details of which are given in para 3 of this order. We find the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 149 days and filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for such delay. Further, on the basis of various submissions filed, the Ld. CIT(A) called for a remand report from

INCOME TAX OFFICER, BODHI TOWER vs. KUMAR BUILDERS PROJECT PUNE PRIVATE LIMITED, BUND GARDEN

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2019-20

condoned and held that the CPC is not correct in denying the claim of deduction u/s 80P of the Act to the assessee under 143(1)(a)(v) proceedings (A.Y. 2019-20) on account of delay in filing of the return by 4 minutes and 42 seconds. 4 9. Referring to the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 PANDHARPUR, INCOME TAX OFFICE PANDHARPUR vs. YASHODA MAHILA NAGARI SAHAKARI PATSANSTHA , MANGALWEDHA DISTRICT SOLAPUR

delay on the part of\nthe assessee in filing of the present appeal before us, therefore, the\nsame merits to be condoned.\n5. On merits, it was submitted by the Ld. A.R. that the A.O\nwhile framing the assessment had after making necessary\nverification taken a plausible view, therefore, the Pr. CIT had\nexceeded his jurisdiction by seeking to review

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of the exemption claim. The imperative condition for availing exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act is due submission of form 10B along with the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. In fact, the CBDT has issued circular/instruction form time-to-time for streamlining the delay in filing of audit report in Form

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of the exemption claim. The imperative condition for availing exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act is due submission of form 10B along with the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. In fact, the CBDT has issued circular/instruction form time-to-time for streamlining the delay in filing of audit report in Form

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of the exemption claim. The imperative condition for availing exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act is due submission of form 10B along with the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. In fact, the CBDT has issued circular/instruction form time-to-time for streamlining the delay in filing of audit report in Form

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of the exemption claim. The imperative condition for availing exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act is due submission of form 10B along with the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. In fact, the CBDT has issued circular/instruction form time-to-time for streamlining the delay in filing of audit report in Form

INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION PUNE BRANCH,SHUKRAWAR PETH vs. DCIT EXEMPTION CIRCLE, PUNE, SWARGATE

In the result, all the 5 appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

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

disallowance of the exemption claim. The imperative condition for availing exemption u/s 11 and 12 of the Act is due submission of form 10B along with the return of income filed u/s 139(1) of the Act. In fact, the CBDT has issued circular/instruction form time-to-time for streamlining the delay in filing of audit report in Form

AUTOCOMP CORPORATION PANSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 1(1), PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal, an empathetic /Aimane view of the matter ought to have been adopted. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not deciding the appeal on merits further erred in not appreciating and considering all the issues emanating from the order of the AO passed under section 143 (3) of the Income

AUTOCOMP CORPORATION PANSE PRIVATE LIMITED ,PUNE vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal, an empathetic /Aimane view of the matter ought to have been adopted. 2. The learned CIT(A) erred in not deciding the appeal on merits further erred in not appreciating and considering all the issues emanating from the order of the AO passed under section 143 (3) of the Income

SHRI MARTAND DEOSANSTHAN JEJURI,PUNE vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), PUNE, PUNE

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

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

disallow the appellant's claim for exemption under Section 11 and 12 of the Act when processing the return under Section 143(1) of the Act. 8.1 Further, Section 119 empowers the Board to issue orders and guidelines regarding the condonation of delay

SHREE GANESH NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,SANGLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5, SANGLI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act at Rs.2,89,33,263/-). 5. Since the appeal filed by the assessee was delayed by 117 days, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee has not given any reason for filing of the appeal and has not filed

SHREE GANESH NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,SANGLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5, SANGLI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

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

disallowed the claim of deduction u/s 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act at Rs.2,89,33,263/-). 5. Since the appeal filed by the assessee was delayed by 117 days, the Ld. CIT(A) / NFAC dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee has not given any reason for filing of the appeal and has not filed

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

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

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

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return