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.

32 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 90(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai628Mumbai535Delhi386Kolkata338Bangalore218Hyderabad213Ahmedabad177Karnataka128Jaipur126Pune85Surat82Raipur77Chandigarh69Nagpur59Visakhapatnam59Indore56Amritsar53Lucknow49Cochin45Calcutta41Rajkot32Patna22SC19Cuttack18Allahabad14Jodhpur12Varanasi11Agra9Jabalpur8Guwahati7Telangana5Panaji4Dehradun4Ranchi3Andhra Pradesh2Rajasthan2Orissa1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1

Key Topics

Section 25023Limitation/Time-bar21Section 143(1)19Section 12A17Section 139(1)13Condonation of Delay13Section 14712Section 80P11Section 143(3)

SULTANPUR JUTH SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD,RAJKOT vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC (PRESENT JURIS. ACIT-DCIT CIR 1(1),, RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 493/RJT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.492 & 493 & 697/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2020-21) Sultanpur Juth Seva Sahkari Assessment Unit, Nfac Mandali Ltd. (Present Juris. Acit-Dcit Vs. Cir-1(1) Sultanpur, At Sultanpur Tal: Gondal, Dist. It Office, New Aayakar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Rajkot – 364470 Rajkot - 360001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaabs0194F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Pad Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

90 days, each. The assessee has moved a petition, requesting the Bench to condone the delay. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given in the petition, we condone the delay and admit these appeals for hearing. 5. First, we shall take two appeals in quantum proceedings, in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

11
Section 80G(5)10
Addition to Income8
Penalty7

SULTANPUR JUTH SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD.,SULTANPUR, TAL. GONDAL, DIST. RAJKOT vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-1 (1), RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 697/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.492 & 493 & 697/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2020-21) Sultanpur Juth Seva Sahkari Assessment Unit, Nfac Mandali Ltd. (Present Juris. Acit-Dcit Vs. Cir-1(1) Sultanpur, At Sultanpur Tal: Gondal, Dist. It Office, New Aayakar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Rajkot – 364470 Rajkot - 360001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaabs0194F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Pad Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

90 days, each. The assessee has moved a petition, requesting the Bench to condone the delay. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given in the petition, we condone the delay and admit these appeals for hearing. 5. First, we shall take two appeals in quantum proceedings, in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024

SULTANPUR JUTH SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD,RAJKOT vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC (PRESENT JURIS. ACIT-DICT CIR 1(1) RAJKOT), RAJKOT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 492/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.492 & 493 & 697/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: (2018-19 & 2020-21) Sultanpur Juth Seva Sahkari Assessment Unit, Nfac Mandali Ltd. (Present Juris. Acit-Dcit Vs. Cir-1(1) Sultanpur, At Sultanpur Tal: Gondal, Dist. It Office, New Aayakar Bhavan, Vatiaka, Rajkot – 364470 Rajkot - 360001 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaabs0194F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sulabh Pad Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

90 days, each. The assessee has moved a petition, requesting the Bench to condone the delay. We have heard both the parties on this preliminary issue. Having regard to the reasons given in the petition, we condone the delay and admit these appeals for hearing. 5. First, we shall take two appeals in quantum proceedings, in ITA No. 492 & 493/Rjt/2024

OM CERAMIC INDUSTRIES,MORBI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD 1, MORBI, MORBI

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

ITA 494/RJT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot30 Oct 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 271ASection 272ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 5

Section 5 is proved, the\napplication must not be thrown out or any delay cannot be refused to be condoned.\nIn Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nirmala Devi &Ors. [(1979) 3 SCR 694]\nwhich is a case of negligence of the counsel which misled a litigant into delayed\npursuit of his remedy the default in delay was condoned

JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD-2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

ITA 519/RJT/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in both appeals and admit these appeals for hearing. 7. In both these appeals, the assessee has raised the grounds pertaining to technical issue, being notice issued under section 148 of the Act, is time barred. When these cases were called for hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue under consideration, in both appeals

JIVANBHAI DE vs. HIBHAI SARLA,THANGADH, DIST. SURENDRANAGARVS.THE ITO WARD 2, SURENDRANAGAR, SURENDRANAGAR

ITA 521/RJT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot09 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Devina Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT-DR &
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in both appeals and admit these appeals for hearing. 7. In both these appeals, the assessee has raised the grounds pertaining to technical issue, being notice issued under section 148 of the Act, is time barred. When these cases were called for hearing, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue under consideration, in both appeals

DILIP KANTILAL KUBAVAT,PORBANDAR vs. ITO WD 2(3), PORBANDAR, PORBANDAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 522/RJT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot14 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Sainiआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.522/Rjt/2025 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year :2016-17 Dilip Kantilal Kubavat Ito बनाम/ Prop. Vijay Dairy Farm, Ward 2 (3), Vs Near Ramdhun S V P Road, Porbandar 360575 Porbandar - 360575 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Azfpk8009B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से/Revenue By : Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date Of Hearing : 09/09/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 14 /10/2025 आदेश/Order Per, Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, A.M The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee, Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], Dated 21.03.2025, Arising In The Matter Of Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Here-In-After Referred To As “The Act”) Relevant To The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds Of Appeal. However, The Solitary Grievance Of The Assessee Is That The Ld Cit(A) Erred In Not To Consider The Basic Fact That The Assessee Has Gifted The Property To His Sister In Law (Younger Brother'S Wife) That Is, To A Relative For A Consideration Dilip Kantilal Kubavat

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Dheeraj Kumr Gupta, Ld. Sr-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

90,000/- dated 09.07.2015, therefore, when the property is sold for a value lower than the stamp duty value of the property, than, in that case, provisions of Section 50C is not applicable, as it is a gift to the relative, which is exempt from tax, and therefore, the addition made of Rs. 11,93,673/- u/s 50C, is against

VIDHYOTEJAK SAMAJ,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, these five appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 704/RJT/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: (2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vidhyotejak Samaj बनाम/ Act, Cpc, Tds, H.B. Jasani Vidya Bhavan, Ghaziabad Vs. Chhelbhai Dave Marg, Vidhyanagar, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatv 1358 G (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-DR
Section 200A(1)

2. identical; therefore, these appeals of the assessee have been clubbed and heard together, and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. ITA Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 Vidhyotejak Samaj 3. These five appeals filed by the assessee, are barred by limitation by 1672 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay

VIDHYOTEJAK SAMAJ,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, these five appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 707/RJT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: (2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vidhyotejak Samaj बनाम/ Act, Cpc, Tds, H.B. Jasani Vidya Bhavan, Ghaziabad Vs. Chhelbhai Dave Marg, Vidhyanagar, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatv 1358 G (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-DR
Section 200A(1)

2. identical; therefore, these appeals of the assessee have been clubbed and heard together, and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. ITA Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 Vidhyotejak Samaj 3. These five appeals filed by the assessee, are barred by limitation by 1672 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay

VIDHYOTEJAK SAMAJ,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, these five appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 705/RJT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: (2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vidhyotejak Samaj बनाम/ Act, Cpc, Tds, H.B. Jasani Vidya Bhavan, Ghaziabad Vs. Chhelbhai Dave Marg, Vidhyanagar, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatv 1358 G (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-DR
Section 200A(1)

2. identical; therefore, these appeals of the assessee have been clubbed and heard together, and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. ITA Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 Vidhyotejak Samaj 3. These five appeals filed by the assessee, are barred by limitation by 1672 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay

VIDHYOTEJAK SAMAJ,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, these five appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 706/RJT/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: (2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vidhyotejak Samaj बनाम/ Act, Cpc, Tds, H.B. Jasani Vidya Bhavan, Ghaziabad Vs. Chhelbhai Dave Marg, Vidhyanagar, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatv 1358 G (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-DR
Section 200A(1)

2. identical; therefore, these appeals of the assessee have been clubbed and heard together, and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. ITA Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 Vidhyotejak Samaj 3. These five appeals filed by the assessee, are barred by limitation by 1672 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay

VIDHYOTEJAK SAMAJ,RAJKOT vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS , GHAZIABAD

In the result, these five appeals filed by the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 703/RJT/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: (2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 To 2013-14) Vidhyotejak Samaj बनाम/ Act, Cpc, Tds, H.B. Jasani Vidya Bhavan, Ghaziabad Vs. Chhelbhai Dave Marg, Vidhyanagar, Rajkot-360 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaatv 1358 G (अपीलाथ" /Assessee) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. Ar राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By :Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 28/07/2025

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Senior-DR
Section 200A(1)

2. identical; therefore, these appeals of the assessee have been clubbed and heard together, and a consolidated order is being passed for the sake of convenience and brevity. ITA Nos.703-707/Rjt/2024 Vidhyotejak Samaj 3. These five appeals filed by the assessee, are barred by limitation by 1672 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay

SHREE PIPARDI SEVA SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED,SURENDRANAGAR vs. THE ITO WARD-2 (1) (2), RAJKOT

In the result, grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 448/RJT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot07 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 448/Rjt/2024 Assessment Year: (2019-20)

Section 143(1)Section 153Section 249(2)Section 80P

Section 249(2) of the Act. The Ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay in filing appeal before Ld.CIT(A) and directed the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue in accordance with law. Th contents of the petition for condoning the delay are reproduced below

PRATIKKUMAR SHASHIKANTBHAI JAVIYA,RAJKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, RAJKOT

In the result, these three appeals of the assessee, are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 867/RJT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot28 Feb 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं/.Ita No.866, 867 & 868/Rjt/2024 "नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 Pratikkumar Shashikantbhai Javiya Ito, Ward-1(1)(1) बनाम B-401, Cosmos Pride, Rajkot. Field Marshal Road Vs. Opp: Speed Well Party Plot Rajkot. Pan :Aiwpj 0996 Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Assessee By : Shri R.D. Lanchandani, Ld.Ar राज"वक"ओरसे/Revenue By : Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.D. Lanchandani, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr-DR
Section 147Section 250

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), all dated 22.10.2024,which in turn arise PratikkumarShashikantbhaiJaviya ITA No.866 to 868/RJT/2024 (AY : 2013-14 to 2015-16) 2 out of separate assessment orders passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Act, all dated 17.9.2021. 2.Since the issue involved in all these

INCOME TAX OFFICER, MORBI vs. MAHENDRAKUMAR BHAGVANDAS RANPURA, MORBI

ITA 251/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot08 Dec 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri D. M. Rindani, Ld. AR
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 68

90% of total sale was shown by the assessee during October only and every\nbill was in cash and below Rs.2,00,000/- to introduce his own unaccounted money in the firm\nin form of bogus sales.\n4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have\nconsidered that the total

SHRI SHANTILAL MALTIPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD.,,JAMNAGAR. vs. THE ASST. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX & THE ITO-TDS-CIRCLE-1,, JAMNAGAR

In the result, ITA No.275/Rjt/2018 is allowed for statistical purposes whereas

ITA 275/RJT/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot01 Jun 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Madhumita Roy)

For Appellant: Shri D. S. Varia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Suhas Mistry, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 154

2) Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this, when delay is condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. (3) 'Every day's delay must be explained' does not mean that

M/S. KUTCH MANDVI BHATIYA MAHAJAN,MANDV-KUTCH vs. THE ITO-WARD-1, RAJKOT

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

ITA 154/RJT/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot12 Dec 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 17

90,000/- on account of amount set apart u/s. 11/12 for specified purposes u/s. 143(1) of the I.T. Act. 2. That, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) & Ld. A.O. are not justified and are bad-in law. 3. The appellant craves to add, amend, alter or delete any of the above grounds of appeals.” 3. The brief facts

SHRI DHORAJI NAGRIK SHARAFI AND GRAHAK SAHKARI MANDALI LIMITED,DHORAJI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2)(1), RAJKOT

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes, in above terms

ITA 478/RJT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot02 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.478/Rjt/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2018-19) (Physical Hearing) Shri Dhoraji Nagrik Sharafi & Vs. Income Tax Officer Grahak Sahkari Mandali Ltd. Ward – 1(2)(1), C/O. Sarda & Sarda, Sakar, 1St Rajkot. Floor, Dr. Radha – Krishnan Road, Opp. Rajkumar College, Rajkot- 360001 "ायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaaad7775Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Desai, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Ld. CIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80ASection 80P

section 119(2) (b) of the Income tax Act, to file the petition for condonation of delay before the learned Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, who may condone the delay in filing the appeal, therefore, assessee`s appeal may be dismissed. 7. We have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the submission put forth on behalf

SHRI RAMA MEPA ODEDARA,PORBANDAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4),, PORBANDAR

In the result, Ground No. 2 of the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 67/RJT/2019[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Rajkot30 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Us, The Counsel For The Assessee Submitted An Application For Condonation Of Delay & Argued That The Reason For Delay In Filing Appeal Before Itat Was That The Assessee Was Suffering From Spinal Injury & Was Advised Complete Bed Rest By The Doctors. In Support Of The Above Contention, The Assessee Also Filed Medical Certificate With Respect To The Injury Suffered

For Appellant: Shri Sagar Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B.D. Gupta, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271Section 69A

condoning the delay of 126 days in filing of the present appeal. On jurisdiction 4. On jurisdiction, the assessee has challenged the initiation of proceedings under section 147 of the Act. However, we observe that in the instant set of facts, there was a substantial cash deposit made by the assessee in his bank account. Further, the assessee has been

SHRI RAMNIKLAL D. AGHERA,KESHOD vs. THE ITO WARD-1,, JUNAGADH

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/RJT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Written SubmissionFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

condoning the delay of 18 days in filing of the present appeal. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee agriculturalist and holds 18.66 acres of land. For Assessment Year 2011-12, the Assessing Officer observed that the assessee had deposited cash aggregating to Rs. 11,50,000/- in his savings bank account maintained with the State