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.

37 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 86clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai425Mumbai346Kolkata272Delhi257Bangalore162Ahmedabad146Karnataka126Jaipur107Hyderabad96Pune87Chandigarh71Nagpur70Cuttack41Indore40Calcutta37Surat37Visakhapatnam29Lucknow24Kerala17Rajkot16Cochin12SC10Patna10Jodhpur9Amritsar9Guwahati9Panaji8Raipur7Allahabad4Telangana3Varanasi2Himachal Pradesh2Orissa1Agra1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Jabalpur1Rajasthan1Ranchi1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 80P35Section 143(3)28Addition to Income25Condonation of Delay24Limitation/Time-bar19Section 80P(2)(d)15Section 6810Section 12A10Section 148

NAVAGAM VIBHAG SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD.,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD 3 , NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 86/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

delay condone petition of the assessee society for filling the appeal within prescribed time and dismissed the appeal without going through merits of the case which is unjustified and bad in law. 5. In finance Act, 2006, section 80P(4) inserted to withdraw exemption U/s 80P to tax co-operative bank. There is no-amendment in finance

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 1448
Section 1548
Exemption8

NAVAGAM VIBHAG SEVA SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD,NA vs. ARIVS.INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3 , NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 88/SRT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

delay condone petition of the assessee society for filling the appeal within prescribed time and dismissed the appeal without going through merits of the case which is unjustified and bad in law. 5. In finance Act, 2006, section 80P(4) inserted to withdraw exemption U/s 80P to tax co-operative bank. There is no-amendment in finance

NAVAGAM VIBHAG SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD-3, NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 89/SRT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

delay condone petition of the assessee society for filling the appeal within prescribed time and dismissed the appeal without going through merits of the case which is unjustified and bad in law. 5. In finance Act, 2006, section 80P(4) inserted to withdraw exemption U/s 80P to tax co-operative bank. There is no-amendment in finance

MOGAR PARTAPORE VIBHAG SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD,NA vs. ARIVS.DCIT, NAVSARI CIRCLE , NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 91/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

delay condone petition of the assessee society for filling the appeal within prescribed time and dismissed the appeal without going through merits of the case which is unjustified and bad in law. 5. In finance Act, 2006, section 80P(4) inserted to withdraw exemption U/s 80P to tax co-operative bank. There is no-amendment in finance

NAVAGAM VIBHAG SEVA SAHKARI MANDLI LTD,NA vs. ARIVS.ITO, WARD 3 , NAVSARI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 87/SRT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri Sujesh C. Suratwala, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)Section 8O

delay condone petition of the assessee society for filling the appeal within prescribed time and dismissed the appeal without going through merits of the case which is unjustified and bad in law. 5. In finance Act, 2006, section 80P(4) inserted to withdraw exemption U/s 80P to tax co-operative bank. There is no-amendment in finance

CHIMANBHAI BHIKHABHAI PATEL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD 1(3)(6), SURAT

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

ITA 1044/SRT/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1044/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 (Hybrid Hearing) Chimanbhai Bhikhabhai Patel Income Tax Officer , Ward-1(3)(6), बनाम/ S. No.3/2, Koliwad, Adajan Income-Tax Office, Anavil Business Vs. Gam, Adajan, Surat-395 009 Centre, Adajan Hazira Road, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afypp 4446 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Appellant By Shri Sapnesh R Sheth, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By Ms. Namita Patel, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 28/08/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 69

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 14.12.2022 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income- tax(Appeals) [in short, ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2014-15, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated

CHINUBHAI VAGHJIBHAI SHETH,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(2), SURAT

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

ITA 572/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.541 & 572/Srt/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2)(2), Chinubhai Vaghjibhai Sheth Room No. 416, Aayakar Bhavan, 16, Choksi Apartment, Shop Opp. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Jain Temple, Katargam, Surat- 395004 Vs. Chinubhai Vaghjibhai Sheth Income Tax Officer, Ward- 16, Chokshi Apartment, Opp. Jain 3(2)(2), Aaykar Bhavan, Room Temple, Katargam, Surat-395004 4Th No. 416, Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bpcps 0828 C (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil K. Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena– CIT.DR &
Section 143(3)Section 68

section 69 of the Act. 10. On appeal, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer observing as follows: “6.1.1. I have considered the assessment order as well as the submissions of the appellant. The Grounds of appeal- Ground No. 1 pertains to the addition of Rs.24,12,500/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment. In this

ITO, WARD 3(2)(2), SURAT vs. CHINUBHAI VAGHJIBHAI SHETH, SURAT

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

ITA 541/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.541 & 572/Srt/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2)(2), Chinubhai Vaghjibhai Sheth Room No. 416, Aayakar Bhavan, 16, Choksi Apartment, Shop Opp. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Jain Temple, Katargam, Surat- 395004 Vs. Chinubhai Vaghjibhai Sheth Income Tax Officer, Ward- 16, Chokshi Apartment, Opp. Jain 3(2)(2), Aaykar Bhavan, Room Temple, Katargam, Surat-395004 4Th No. 416, Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bpcps 0828 C (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil K. Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena– CIT.DR &
Section 143(3)Section 68

section 69 of the Act. 10. On appeal, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer observing as follows: “6.1.1. I have considered the assessment order as well as the submissions of the appellant. The Grounds of appeal- Ground No. 1 pertains to the addition of Rs.24,12,500/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment. In this

CHINUBHAI VAGHJIBHAI SHETH,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(2), SURAT

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

ITA 571/SRT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.541 & 572/Srt/2019 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2011-12) (Physical Court Hearing) Income Tax Officer, Ward -3(2)(2), Chinubhai Vaghjibhai Sheth Room No. 416, Aayakar Bhavan, 16, Choksi Apartment, Shop Opp. Majura Gate, Surat-395001 Jain Temple, Katargam, Surat- 395004 Vs. Chinubhai Vaghjibhai Sheth Income Tax Officer, Ward- 16, Chokshi Apartment, Opp. Jain 3(2)(2), Aaykar Bhavan, Room Temple, Katargam, Surat-395004 4Th No. 416, Floor, Aaykar Bhawan, Majura Gate, Surat- 395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Bpcps 0828 C (Appellant ) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Anil K. Shah, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.P. Meena– CIT.DR &
Section 143(3)Section 68

section 69 of the Act. 10. On appeal, Ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of the Assessing Officer observing as follows: “6.1.1. I have considered the assessment order as well as the submissions of the appellant. The Grounds of appeal- Ground No. 1 pertains to the addition of Rs.24,12,500/- u/s 69 on account of unexplained investment. In this

SHRI LALJIBHAI KALUBHAI MIYANI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(5), SURAT

ITA 246/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Shri Jivrajbhai Kalubhai Miyani, I.T.O., A/31, 32 Ramdevpir Nagar, Ward 3(3)(2), Vs. Varachha Road, Varachha, Surat. Surat-395006. Pan No. Aempm 3134 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Shri Laljibhai Kalubhai Miyani, I.T.O., 83, Shirdidham Society, Hira Ward 3(3)(5), Vs. Baug, Varachha Road, Surat. Surat-395006. Pan No. Ablpp 5096 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 154Section 156Section 254(1)Section 50C

condone the delay in filing appeal and admit the same for adjudication. Now adverting to the facts of the case, leading to filing the present appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 30/03/2013 declaring income of Rs. 6,86,470/-. The assessee

SHRI JIVRAJBHAI KALUBHAI MIYANI,SURAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 3(3)(2), SURAT

ITA 245/SRT/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Dr. Arjun Lal Saini(Physical Hearing) Shri Jivrajbhai Kalubhai Miyani, I.T.O., A/31, 32 Ramdevpir Nagar, Ward 3(3)(2), Vs. Varachha Road, Varachha, Surat. Surat-395006. Pan No. Aempm 3134 P Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Shri Laljibhai Kalubhai Miyani, I.T.O., 83, Shirdidham Society, Hira Ward 3(3)(5), Vs. Baug, Varachha Road, Surat. Surat-395006. Pan No. Ablpp 5096 K Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 154Section 156Section 254(1)Section 50C

condone the delay in filing appeal and admit the same for adjudication. Now adverting to the facts of the case, leading to filing the present appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2012-13 on 30/03/2013 declaring income of Rs. 6,86,470/-. The assessee

BASANTILAL TARBA,RAJASTHAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WD-3(1)(2), SURAT

In the result, the ground of appeal raised in this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 512/SRT/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat26 Sept 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.512/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2010-11) (Hybrid Hearing) Bansntilal Tarba Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1)(2), बनाम/ 429/1023, Sundarnagar, Surat, Aaykar Bhavan, Majura Gate, Vs. Ahimsa Circle, Bhilwara, Surat-395 001 Rajasthan- 311 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Afipt 1037 P (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, Ca राज" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri Ravinder Sindhu, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing 23/07/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025

Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, 'the Act’) dated 24.01.2024 by the National Face Less Appeal Centre (NFAC),Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short, ‘CIT(A)’] for the assessment year (AY) 2010-11, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by the Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s. 144 r.w.s

GOODWILL FOUNDATION CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), SURAT

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

ITA 426/SRT/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.427 & 426/Srt/2025 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Hybrid Hearing) Goodwill Foundation Charitable Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Trust, Ahmedabad A 102, Sky Heaven Ved Gurukul Road Ved, Surat - 395004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadtg9648P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Harikrishna Gohil, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 253(3)Section 80G(5)(iii)

86 days in filling appeals, was neither intentional nor deliberate. The reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delays would constitute “sufficient cause” for delay in filing these appeals. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit both appeals for hearing. 6. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application for approval under

GOODWILL FOUNATION CHARITABLE TRUST,SURAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), SURAT

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

ITA 427/SRT/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Surat11 Jun 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Ms Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.427 & 426/Srt/2025 (Assessment Years: 2024-25) (Hybrid Hearing) Goodwill Foundation Charitable Vs. The Cit(Exemption), Trust, Ahmedabad A 102, Sky Heaven Ved Gurukul Road Ved, Surat - 395004 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadtg9648P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Harikrishna Gohil, Ar Respondent By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 09/06/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 11/06/2025

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 253(3)Section 80G(5)(iii)

86 days in filling appeals, was neither intentional nor deliberate. The reasons given in the affidavit for condonation of delays would constitute “sufficient cause” for delay in filing these appeals. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit both appeals for hearing. 6. The facts of the case in brief are that the assessee filed an application for approval under

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR.,2, SURAT vs. VIJAYBHAI MALABHAI BHARWAD, SURAT

In the result, ground no.2 raised by the assessee in ITA

ITA 121/SRT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं/It(Ss)A Nos.23 & 24/Srt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 3, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Acit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Circle -1(2), Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 2, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं It(Ss)A Nos.90/Srt/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Dcit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Central Circle – 3, Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat. Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 21. The concise and summarized grounds of appeal in Assessee`s appeal, in IT(SS)A No.90/SRT/2022, for AY.2014-15, are reproduced below for ready reference as follows: “(i) Ground nos. 1 and 2: On the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as law, on the subject, the issuance

VIJAYBHAI MALABHAI BHARWAD,SURAT vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIR.,-1(2), SURAT

In the result, ground no.2 raised by the assessee in ITA

ITA 118/SRT/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Surat27 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं/It(Ss)A Nos.23 & 24/Srt/2021 (Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14) (Physical Hearing) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 3, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.118/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Acit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Circle -1(2), Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 Surat "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.121/Srt/2021 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) The Dcit, Vs. Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Central Circle – 2, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Surat. Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent) आयकर(खोज-और-ज"ती)अपील सं It(Ss)A Nos.90/Srt/2022 (Assessment Year: 2014-15) Vijaybhai Malabhai Bharwad, Vs. The Dcit, B-58, Chandramani Apartment, Central Circle – 3, Udhana Magdalla Road, Surat. Surat - 395007 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aclpv4173C (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 132Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 68Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 21. The concise and summarized grounds of appeal in Assessee`s appeal, in IT(SS)A No.90/SRT/2022, for AY.2014-15, are reproduced below for ready reference as follows: “(i) Ground nos. 1 and 2: On the facts and circumstances of the case, as well as law, on the subject, the issuance

SHREE SHILDHA VIBHAG JUNGLE KAMDAR SAHAKARI MANDLI LTD,VALSAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, VALSAD

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

ITA 461/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Surat26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.461/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 (Hybrid Hearing) Shree Shildha Vibhag Jungle Income Tax Officer बनाम/ Kamdar Sahakari Mandli Ward-4, Valsad Vs. At & Post Nana Pondha, Kaprada Road, Valsad-396 065 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaaas 6185 R (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे/Appellant By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज"वक"ओरसे /Respondent By Shri Abhishek Gautam, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 23/09/2025 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 26/09/2025

Section 144Section 250

section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) dated 23.02.2024 by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi/Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [in short, ‘Ld. CIT(A)’] for the Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13, which in turn arises out of assessment order passed by Assessing Officer (in short, ‘AO’) u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated

SARFARAJ MOHMED BALERA,BHARUCH, GUJARAT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(5), WARD (), BHARUCH

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

ITA 112/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Nov 2025AY 2012-13
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 69A

Section 69A of the Act\nand therefore no addition could be made.\n6. The appellant craves for leave to add or amend or alter any of the grounds of appeal.\n2.\nAt the outset Registry of this Tribunal bring to the notice that appeal filed by\nthe assesse is barred by delay of 121 days. The applicant submitted an application

DINESHKUMAR NANUBHAI VIRVAL,SURAT vs. ITO, WARD-1, BARDOLI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 101/SRT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Dinesh Mohan Sinha&Shri Bijayananda Pruseth

For Appellant: Shri P M JAGASETH, CAFor Respondent: Shri AJAY UKE, SR. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 69A

86,604/- of cash deposits and the credit entries in the bank accounts has been confirmed by ld. CIT(A). 4. The assesse challenged the legality and validity of order of ld. CIT(A) by moving of an appeal before this Tribunal along with an application for condonation of delay. 5. Ld. AR very humbly submitted that there

THE DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1)(2),, SURAT vs. M/S. KEJRIWAL INDUSTRIES LTD.,, SURAT

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1509/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri O.P.Meena

Section 131Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 68

condone the delay in filing of appeal and allow the appeal to be proceeded with on merit. The Grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue read as under: 5. “[1] On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of DCIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Surat Vs. Kejriwal