MUKESH DAHYABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, RANGE -3(2), SURAT
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed
ITA 150/SRT/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat20 Sept 2021AY 2010-11
Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.150/Srt/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Virtual Court Hearing) Mukesh Dahyabhai Patel, Vs. The Jcit, Rang-3(2), Prop. Of Mukesh Textiles, P-414-417, Surat. New Gidc, Katargam, Surat-395004. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Abbpp2226M (Assessee) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Himali Mistry, Ca Revenue By : Ms Anupama Singhla, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 27/08/2021 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 20/09/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. A. L. Saini: Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2010-11, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Surat [In Short “The Ld. Cit(A)”] In Appeal No. Cas/3/453/2015-16 Dated 24.08.2017, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”). 2. Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows: “(1) On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & As Per Law, The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Levying Penalty Of Rs.3,22,018/- U/S.271D Of The Act. (2) The Assessee Submits That The Learned Cit(A) Did Not Properly Appreciate The Real Nature Of Transactions & Therefore, Was Not Justified In Confirming The Above Penalty. (3)The Assessee Craves Leave To Add, Alter Or Vary Any Of The Grounds Of Appeal.”
For Appellant: Ms Himali Mistry, CAFor Respondent: Ms Anupama Singhla, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271D
114 days. The assessee has moved a petition requesting the Bench to condone the delay. Learned Counsel explained the reasons that Mr.
Assessment Year.2010-11
Mukesh Dahyabhai Patel
Mukesh Dahyabhai Patel died on 07.02.2021 after that his wife succeeded his pending litigations, and as a result there was delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. We have heard both
