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

condoning delay in filing of appeal before CIT (A). 4. The assessee submitted before the CIT (A) found that there is delay in these appeal ranging between 101 days to 701 days in filing of appeal before him. The assessee has filed a chart showing delay for various quarters for filing of appeal. The main reason for delay is claimed

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

condoning delay in filing of appeal before CIT (A). 4. The assessee submitted before the CIT (A) found that there is delay in these appeal ranging between 101 days to 701 days in filing of appeal before him. The assessee has filed a chart showing delay for various quarters for filing of appeal. The main reason for delay is claimed

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

condoning delay in filing of appeal before CIT (A). 4. The assessee submitted before the CIT (A) found that there is delay in these appeal ranging between 101 days to 701 days in filing of appeal before him. The assessee has filed a chart showing delay for various quarters for filing of appeal. The main reason for delay is claimed

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

condoning delay in filing of appeal before CIT (A). 4. The assessee submitted before the CIT (A) found that there is delay in these appeal ranging between 101 days to 701 days in filing of appeal before him. The assessee has filed a chart showing delay for various quarters for filing of appeal. The main reason for delay is claimed

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

condoning delay in filing of appeal before CIT (A). 4. The assessee submitted before the CIT (A) found that there is delay in these appeal ranging between 101 days to 701 days in filing of appeal before him. The assessee has filed a chart showing delay for various quarters for filing of appeal. The main reason for delay is claimed

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

5) are not proved by the assessee. Even no details of the utilization the assessee. In this regard CBDT has issued a circular no. 273 dated 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

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

5) are not proved by the assessee. Even no details of the utilization the assessee. In this regard CBDT has issued a circular no. 273 dated 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

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

5) are not proved by the assessee. Even no details of the utilization the assessee. In this regard CBDT has issued a circular no. 273 dated 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

SHRI JAYESH CHANDULAL SHAH,SURAT vs. ITO,WARD-3(3)(2),, SURAT

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.50/Srt/2020 Assessment Year: (2000-01) (Physical Hearing) Jayesh Chandulal Shah, The Ito, Vs. A-74, Saify Society, Near Jain Ward – 3(3)(2), Temple, L. H. Road, Surat Surat – 395006. Old Jurisdiction Ito, Ward- 9(2), Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Adzps8832Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

section 253(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 26.02.2020 vide ITA No.50/SRT/2020 against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) relating to A.Y.2000-01 made on the 19.08.2009, which was communicated to us on the 08.10.2009. Though this appeal should have been filed in the office of the Tribunal on or before the 07.12.2009 counting the period of sixty days

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

5) are not proved by the assessee. Even no details of the utilization of accumulated funds for the specified objects have been placed on record by the assessee. In this regard CBDT has issued a circular no. 273 dated 3-6-1980 whereby some of the following conditions are to be fulfilled by the assessee for condonation of delay. That

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)

4. Shri P.M.Jagasheth, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset begins by pointing out that in case of all these thirteen appeals, the assessing officer levied the penalty under 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

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)

4. Shri P.M.Jagasheth, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset begins by pointing out that in case of all these thirteen appeals, the assessing officer levied the penalty under 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

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)

4. Shri P.M.Jagasheth, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset begins by pointing out that in case of all these thirteen appeals, the assessing officer levied the penalty under 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

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)

4. Shri P.M.Jagasheth, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset begins by pointing out that in case of all these thirteen appeals, the assessing officer levied the penalty under 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

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)

4. Shri P.M.Jagasheth, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset begins by pointing out that in case of all these thirteen appeals, the assessing officer levied the penalty under 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

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)

4. Shri P.M.Jagasheth, Learned Counsel for the assessee, at the outset begins by pointing out that in case of all these thirteen appeals, the assessing officer levied the penalty under 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

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

4 notices, which is at para 2 of the appellate order.\nThere was non-compliance on the part of the appellant. Since the appeal\nwas filed late after a gap of 11 years, the appellant was also asked to\nproduce documentary evidence of service of demand notice and also explain\nthe reasons for the inordinate delayed in filling appeals. There

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)

5 months. 16. In view of the above facts and respectfully following the authoritative precedents cited supra, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in refusing to condone the inordinate delay in filing appeals before him in terms of provisions of section 249(3) of the Act, in absence of any sufficient cause. Accordingly, the appeal