NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

3-6-1980 whereby some of the following conditions are to be fulfilled by the assessee for condonation of delay. That the failure to give notice to the Income-Tax Officer under section 11(2) of the Act and investment of the money in the prescribed securities was due only to oversight. That the trustees or the settler have

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

3-6-1980 whereby some of the following conditions are to be fulfilled by the assessee for condonation of delay. That the failure to give notice to the Income-Tax Officer under section 11(2) of the Act and investment of the money in the prescribed securities was due only to oversight. That the trustees or the settler have

NAVBHARAT CHARITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, , BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhita No. 383, 384 & 385/Srt/2022 (Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi, Jhagadia, Ward-1, Vs. Bharuch. Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

3-6-1980 whereby some of the following conditions are to be fulfilled by the assessee for condonation of delay. That the failure to give notice to the Income-Tax Officer under section 11(2) of the Act and investment of the money in the prescribed securities was due only to oversight. That the trustees or the settler have

STATE BANK OF INDIA (AHWA BRANCH),,DANG vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

3. “Every day’s delay must be explained” does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour’s delay, every second’s delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred

STATE BANK OF INDIA (VYARA BRANCH),,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

3. “Every day’s delay must be explained” does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour’s delay, every second’s delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred

STATE BANK OF INDIA (AHWA BRANCH),,DANG vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

3. “Every day’s delay must be explained” does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour’s delay, every second’s delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred

STATE BANK OF INDIA (AHWA BRANCH),,DANG vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

3. “Every day’s delay must be explained” does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour’s delay, every second’s delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred

STATE BANK OF INDIA (VYARA BRANCH),,NA vs. ARIVS.THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee in I

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena, Accoutant Member आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.3419 & 3420/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2013-14 & 2014-15 State Bank Of India, Assistant Commissioner Vyara Branch, Navsari Of Income Tax(Cpc) Pan: Aaacs 8577 K Ghaziabad अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

3. “Every day’s delay must be explained” does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour’s delay, every second’s delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred

AIRLINK COMMUNICATION PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ASST./ DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE TDS, , SURAT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.53 To 57/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Airlink Communication Pvt. Ltd. Asst./Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Tds, Aaykar Bhavan, 1-2, Annapurna Shopping Centre, Vs. Surat-395001 1St Floor Aadajan Patia, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaufr 6898 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 200A of the Income Tax Act and when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing these appeals. There are delay in filing these appeals before the ld CIT(A) which ranges from 316 days to 1216 days. Before, ld CIT(A), the assessee

AIRLINK COMMUNICATION PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS-1), SURAT, SURAT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.53 To 57/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Airlink Communication Pvt. Ltd. Asst./Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Tds, Aaykar Bhavan, 1-2, Annapurna Shopping Centre, Vs. Surat-395001 1St Floor Aadajan Patia, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaufr 6898 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 200A of the Income Tax Act and when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing these appeals. There are delay in filing these appeals before the ld CIT(A) which ranges from 316 days to 1216 days. Before, ld CIT(A), the assessee

AIRLINK COMMUNICATION PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ASST./ DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE TDS, , SURAT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.53 To 57/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Airlink Communication Pvt. Ltd. Asst./Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Tds, Aaykar Bhavan, 1-2, Annapurna Shopping Centre, Vs. Surat-395001 1St Floor Aadajan Patia, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaufr 6898 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 200A of the Income Tax Act and when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing these appeals. There are delay in filing these appeals before the ld CIT(A) which ranges from 316 days to 1216 days. Before, ld CIT(A), the assessee

AIRLINK COMMUNICATION PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ASST./ DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE TDS, , SURAT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.53 To 57/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Airlink Communication Pvt. Ltd. Asst./Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Tds, Aaykar Bhavan, 1-2, Annapurna Shopping Centre, Vs. Surat-395001 1St Floor Aadajan Patia, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaufr 6898 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 200A of the Income Tax Act and when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing these appeals. There are delay in filing these appeals before the ld CIT(A) which ranges from 316 days to 1216 days. Before, ld CIT(A), the assessee

AIRLINK COMMUNICATION PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ASST./ DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE TDS, , SURAT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.53 To 57/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Airlink Communication Pvt. Ltd. Asst./Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Tds, Aaykar Bhavan, 1-2, Annapurna Shopping Centre, Vs. Surat-395001 1St Floor Aadajan Patia, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaufr 6898 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 200A of the Income Tax Act and when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing these appeals. There are delay in filing these appeals before the ld CIT(A) which ranges from 316 days to 1216 days. Before, ld CIT(A), the assessee

AIRLINK COMMUNICATION PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. ASST./ DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE TDS, , SURAT

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No.53 To 57/Srt/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2013-14) (Physical Court Hearing) Airlink Communication Pvt. Ltd. Asst./Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle, Tds, Aaykar Bhavan, 1-2, Annapurna Shopping Centre, Vs. Surat-395001 1St Floor Aadajan Patia, Surat- 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaufr 6898 R (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

section 200A of the Income Tax Act and when the assessee carried the matter in appeal before ld CIT(A), the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay in filing these appeals. There are delay in filing these appeals before the ld CIT(A) which ranges from 316 days to 1216 days. Before, ld CIT(A), the assessee

NAVBHARAT CHERITABLE TRUST,BHARUCH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, BHARUCH

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

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Navbharat Charitable Trust, I.T.O., 0, Rajpardi Jhagadia, Bharuch, Ward-1, Vs. Gujarat, Pin-393115 Bharuch. Pan No. Aactn 0979 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

3-6-1980 whereby some of the following conditions are to be fulfilled by the assessee for condonation of delay. That the failure to give notice to the Income-Tax Officer under section 11(2) of the Act and investment of the money in the prescribed securities was due only to oversight. That the trustees or the settler have

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , TDS, CPC, SURAT

Section 3 of the Limitation Act;\n(v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if\nsufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is\ndiscretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is\nestablished for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay,\nnegligence and want of due diligence

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CPC, SURAT

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 3 of the Limitation Act; (v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence

ALTRET INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED,SURAT vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS, CPC

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in dismissed

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth(Hybrid Hearing)

Section 3 of the Limitation Act; (v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay, negligence and want of due diligence