Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy

7 SCC 123Supreme Court of India1998#203 most cited

What is Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy authority for?

The Supreme Court outlines the principles for condoning delay in filing appeals, stating that a litigant's lapse is not always a bar if the explanation is bona fide and not a dilatory strategy. Courts should show utmost consideration to suitors and prioritize substantial justice unless the delay is deliberately to gain time.

368

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy · condonation of delay · delay in filing appeal · Section 253(5) · Section 249(3) · Section 253 · Section 249 · Section 250 · reasonable cause · sufficient cause · substantial justice · bona fide explanation

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 253(5)Section 148Section 249(3)Section 5

Issues it is cited on

section 253(5)section 249(3)section 249section 253delay in filing appealcondonation of delaysection 24registration under section 12asection 80g(5)reasonable causesection 80gsection 12ab

Judgments citing Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy

Sachin Chawla Ludhiana, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(1), Ludhiana

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 206/CHANDI/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.205/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.206/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Sachin Chawla Ito Ward-2(1) बनाम/ Vs. B-Xxiii, 2945 Link Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Ganesh Nagar, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aggpc-0079-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate.) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-07-2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate.) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271A

…same very reasons. In this background, Ld. AR sought adjudication of appeals on merits. The same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 2. Keeping in mind the guiding principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (7 SCC 123) with respect to delay, we condone the delay before Tribunal as well as before Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessment has been framed on best judgment basis, the quantum appeal is set aside to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The levy of penalty is consequential in nature an…

Sachin Chawla Ludhiana, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(1), Ludhiana

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 205/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.205/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 2. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.206/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Sachin Chawla Ito Ward-2(1) बनाम/ Vs. B-Xxiii, 2945 Link Road Aaykar Bhawan, Rishi Nagar Ganesh Nagar, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aggpc-0079-H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate.) – Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-07-2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate.) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 271A

…same very reasons. In this background, Ld. AR sought adjudication of appeals on merits. The same has been opposed by Ld. Sr. DR. 2. Keeping in mind the guiding principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (7 SCC 123) with respect to delay, we condone the delay before Tribunal as well as before Ld. CIT(A). Since the assessment has been framed on best judgment basis, the quantum appeal is set aside to the file of Ld. AO for de novo assessment with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. The levy of penalty is consequential in nature an…

Pola Co Operative Societies Limited, Fatehgarh Sahib vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward Sirhind, Sirhind

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1146/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.1146/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Pola Co-Operative Societies Limited Ito Village Pola बनाम/ Vs. Ward Sirhind Fatehgarh Sahib 140406 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aabat-3441-N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca)– Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Kusum Bansal (Cit) – Ld. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21-07-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23-07-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of An Order Of Ld Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Central (Nfac), Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 15-10- 2024 In The Matter Of An Assessment Framed By Ld. Assessing Officer [Ao] On Best Judgment Basis U/S 144 Of The Act On 24-05-2021. The Grievance Of The Assessee Is Assessment Of Income At Rs.554.22 Lacs. The Assessee Has Failed To Appear Before Ld. Ao. The Ld. Cit(A) Did

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal (CA)– Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 144

…see to plead and prove its case before lower authorities. The Ld. CIT-DR, on the other hand, pleaded for dismissal of the appeal. 2. Keeping in mind the guiding principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (7 SCC 123), we condone the delay in first appeal and set aside the impugned order and restore the appeal back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de novo adjudication by way of speaking order with a direction to the assessee to plead and prove its case forthwith. 3. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 23-07-2025. (RAJPAL YADAV) (…

Micro Plantae Ltd, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-5(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 5112/MUM/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Prabhash Shankar(Physical Hearing) Micro Plantae Ltd. Acit – 5(2), 4, Unity House, 2Nd Floor, Vs Aayakar Bhawan, 8, M.P. Marg, Opera House, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai – 400004. [Pan No. Aaacm3686P] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

Section 144Section 144(1)(c)Section 250Section 254(1)Section 40Section 69

…appeal. To support submission the learned AR of the assessee has relied upon the following decision.  Collector of Land Acquisition vs Mst. Katiji and Ors. 167 ITR 471  Vijay Vishin Meghani vs DCIT and Anr 398 ITR 250  N. Balakrishnan vs M. Krishnamurthy 7 SCC 123  Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Nirmala Devi and Ors 118 ITR 507  Phoenix Mills Ltd. vs ACIT (ITA No. 6240/M/2007 dated 23.03.2010)  CIT vs Phoenix Mills Ltd. (ITA No. 5596 of 2010 dated 09.12.2011) 5 Micro Plantae Ltd.(AY 2005-06)  Dr. (Mrs.) Sudha S. Trivedi vs ITO 125 TTJ 42  DCIT vs Chhattisgarh State Electricity Board 2226…

Mahim United Industrial Premises Co Op Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 21(2)(2), Piramal Chamber

In the result, application for condonation of

ITA 2306/MUM/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 143(1)Section 254(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…t gaining anything by filing appeal belatedly. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Katiji 167 ITR 471 (SC) and N. Balakrishnan Vs M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123. 4. On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue strongly opposed plea of ld. AR of the assessee in seeking the condonation of delay. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee is a co-operative society of entrepreneurs as suggested by its name itself. The CPC processed the return of in…

Mahim United Industrial Premises Co Op Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 21(2)(2), Piramal Chamber

In the result, application for condonation of

ITA 2305/MUM/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 143(1)Section 254(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…t gaining anything by filing appeal belatedly. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Katiji 167 ITR 471 (SC) and N. Balakrishnan Vs M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123. 4. On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue strongly opposed plea of ld. AR of the assessee in seeking the condonation of delay. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee is a co-operative society of entrepreneurs as suggested by its name itself. The CPC processed the return of in…

Mahim United Industrial Premises Co Op Society Limited, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 21(2)(2), Piramal Chambers

In the result, application for condonation of

ITA 2304/MUM/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Jul 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 143(1)Section 254(1)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…t gaining anything by filing appeal belatedly. In support of his submission, the ld. AR of the assessee relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Katiji 167 ITR 471 (SC) and N. Balakrishnan Vs M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123. 4. On the other hand, learned Senior Departmental Representative (ld. Sr. DR) for the revenue strongly opposed plea of ld. AR of the assessee in seeking the condonation of delay. The ld. Sr. DR for the revenue submits that the assessee is a co-operative society of entrepreneurs as suggested by its name itself. The CPC processed the return of in…

Rajasthan State Bharat Scout and Guide, Jaipur vs. Income-Tax Officer (Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 382/JPR/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 11(5)

…hat a period be put to litigation). Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of the parties, rather the idea is that every legal remedy must be kept alive for a legislatively fixed period of time." 2. N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 "The primary function of a Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. The time limit fixed for approaching the Court in different situations is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transform into a good cause. Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties. They…

Rajasthan State Bharat Scout and Guide, Jaipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Holding Charge of ITO Exemptions, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 381/JPR/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 11(5)

…hat a period be put to litigation). Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of the parties, rather the idea is that every legal remedy must be kept alive for a legislatively fixed period of time." 2. N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 "The primary function of a Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. The time limit fixed for approaching the Court in different situations is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transform into a good cause. Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties. They…

Baljit Singh, Rupnagar vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(2), Ropar

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 295/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 295/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम Shri Baljit Singh, The Ito, Village Chalaki Tejpur, Ward 2(2), Vs Chamkaur Sahib, Ropar. Ropar (Punjab). "थायी लेखा सं./Pan /Tan No: Fhnps5198J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ , च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 295/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम Shri Baljit Singh, The ITO, Village Chalaki Tejpur, Ward 2(2), VS Chamkaur Sahib, Ropar. Ropar (Punjab). "थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: FHNPS5198J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr. DR तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15.07…

Bluebell Tradecom LLP (Successor of Bluebell Tradecom Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward-1(1) Now I.T.O., Ward-5(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 500/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: the Honorable ITAT and accordingly the appeal was prepared.

Section 271(1)(c)Section 5

…ious risk. 6. It must be grapped that the judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalise injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so. (b) In N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 the Apex Court explained the scope of limitation and condonation of delay, observing as under: "The primary function of a Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. The time-limit fixed for approaching the Court in different situations is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transf…

Bluebell Tradecom LLP (Successor of Bluebell Tradecom Pvt. Ltd.), Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(4), Kolkata Currently ITO, Ward-5(1), Kolkata

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 499/KOL/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jul 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: the Honorable ITAT and accordingly the appeal was prepared.

Section 271(1)(c)Section 5

…ious risk. 6. It must be grapped that the judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalise injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so. (b) In N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 the Apex Court explained the scope of limitation and condonation of delay, observing as under: "The primary function of a Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and to advance substantial justice. The time-limit fixed for approaching the Court in different situations is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transf…

Mr. Anil Narpatlal Gandhi, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 19(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 1921/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 147Section 254(1)Section 68

…dministrator, Howrah Municipality (AIR 1972 SC 749),  Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji &Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471- SC,  Vedabai Alia Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil Vs Shantaram Baburao Patil (253 ITR 798)  N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) (7 SCC 123)  Mahaveer Prasad Jain Vs. CIT (1998) (172 ITR 331 (MP)  Artis Tre Pvt. Ltd. Vs CBDT & Ors. (2014) (369 ITR 691 (BOM) 4. On merit, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that ld. CIT(A) in para 5 of his order as recorded about issuance of notice. In one or two occasions, the assessee sought adjournment. The appeal of assessee was pending since May…

Mr. Anil Narpatlal Gandhi, Mumbai vs. ITO, Ward -19(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 1920/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh

Section 147Section 254(1)Section 68

…dministrator, Howrah Municipality (AIR 1972 SC 749),  Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji &Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471- SC,  Vedabai Alia Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil Vs Shantaram Baburao Patil (253 ITR 798)  N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) (7 SCC 123)  Mahaveer Prasad Jain Vs. CIT (1998) (172 ITR 331 (MP)  Artis Tre Pvt. Ltd. Vs CBDT & Ors. (2014) (369 ITR 691 (BOM) 4. On merit, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that ld. CIT(A) in para 5 of his order as recorded about issuance of notice. In one or two occasions, the assessee sought adjournment. The appeal of assessee was pending since May…

Aar Gee Educational and Technical Society, Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1676/DEL/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Manish Agarwalaar Gee Educational & Commissioner Of Income Technical Society, Tax (Exemptions), 50, Masi Garh, Second Floor, Vs. Delhi. Opp. Sukhdev Vihar, New Delhi-110025 Pan:Aabta9238K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Ca Pradeep Dang Department By Shri Narpat Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.06.2025 O R D E R Per Manish Agarwal, Am: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions), Delhi (‘The Cit(E) In Short), Dated 25.04.2023 Rejecting The Application For Registration U/S 12A Of The Act.

Section 12A

…AAR Gee Educational And Technical Society vs. CIT(E) and both the appeals be admitted for adjudication and delay is bonafide. In this regard reliance is placed on the judgement of hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 and in the case of Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. Asstt. CIT [2019] 419 ITR 732 (SC). 3. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR objected to the condonation of delay in the filing of the appeal. 4. Heard both the parties. From the perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee and the reasons stated therein, we find that there is sufficient and reasonable…

Shailesh Hatmal Jain, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 3197/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Dhaval Shah &For Respondent: Shri Asif Karmali
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)

…e following judicial precedents: (i) Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others [167 ITR 471]. (ii) Judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N.Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnan [(1998) 7 SCC 123]. (iii) Judgment of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Ahmedabad Electricity Co. Ltd. Vs. Electricity Mazdoor Sabha & Anr. [XXX GLR 823 (Guj.)]. (iv) Judgment of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sonerao Sadashivrao Patil Vs. Godawarbhai [1999 (2) Mh.L.J. 272]. (v) Judgment of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Sm…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Ludhiana vs. Malbros International Pvt Ltd, Faridkot

In the result, both the appeals and the Cross Objections are dismissed

ITA 992/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2016-17 The Dcit, Vs Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Ludhiana. Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. Nos. 46 & 45/Chd/2024 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 992 & 993/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18, 2016-17 Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., The Dcit, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Vs Central Circle-2, Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Ludhiana. Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aadcm7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Advocate Revenue By : Smt. Kusum Bansal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal, CIT DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 992 & 993/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2016-17 The DCIT, Vs Malbros International Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Village – Mansoorwal, Teh-Zira, Ludhiana. Head Offices Old Cantt. Road, Faridkot. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AADCM7203R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & C.O. Nos. 46 & 45/CHD/2024 IN आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 992 & 993/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18…

Nanag Ram Meena, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 6(4), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is partly allowed as indicated

ITA 1398/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Issuing The Notice U/S 148. The Action Of The Ld. Ao Was Illegal & Therefore Deserves To Be Quashed Or Set Aside. 2

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Gupta, CA andFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT -DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 50CSection 54F

…Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) – It was held that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations and that a liberal approach should be adopted while condoning delay. N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy [(1998) 7 SCC 123] – It was held that a meritorious matter should not be rejected on technical grounds of limitation. In view of the above, it is humbly prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly condone the delay in filing the present appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits in the interest of justice and equity. To this effect, the assessee has file…

Vikas Mineral Foods Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(4), Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1001/CHANDI/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh19 Jun 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1001/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vikas Mineral Foods Pvt.Ltd., The Ito, House No.20, Nac, Vs Ward 3(4), Shivalik Enclave, Chandigarh. Mani Majra. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcv2453J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Harry Rikhy, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 26.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2025 Physical Hearing O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1001/CHD/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Vikas Mineral Foods Pvt.Ltd., The ITO, House No.20, NAC, Vs Ward 3(4), Shivalik Enclave, Chandigarh. Mani Majra. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCV2453J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Harry Rikhy, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 26.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 19.06.2025 PHYSICAL H…

The Pakhowal M.P.C.S.Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward-1, Jagraon, Ludhiana

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 915/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Laliet Kumar, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No.915/Chandi/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Pakhowal M.P.C.S.Ltd. Ito Village Pakhowal Tehsil Raikot बनाम/ Vs. Ward-1 District Ludhiana.141108 Jagraon. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.Aaaat-4714-D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Manpreet Singh Kanda (Advocate )–Ld. Ar ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Dr Ranjit Kaur (Addl. Cit) – Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04-06-2025 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09-06-2025 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year (Ay) 2018-19 Arises Out Of An Order Of Learned Addl. / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 07-08-2024 In The Matter Of An Intimation Issued By Cpc U/S 143(1) On 12-07-2019 Denying Deduction Claimed By The Assessee U/S 80P(2)(B)(I) For Rs.6.10 Lacs. The Ld. Cit(A) Did Not Admit The Appeal For Want Of Condonation Of Delay Of 1571 Days Aggrieved, The Assessee Is In Further Appeal Before Us.

For Appellant: Shri Manpreet Singh Kanda (Advocate )–Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 80P(2)(b)

…g recently introduced faceless regime could not be ruled out. The assessee would not gain anything by not filing the appeal on time. Keeping in mind the guiding principles laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (7 SCC 123), we condone the delay before Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is restored back to Ld. CIT(A) for admission and adjudication on merits. The assessee is directed to plead and prove its case forthwith. 3 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 09-06-2025. (LALIET KUMAR) (MANOJ…