CIT v. Ram Mohan Kabra

257 ITR 773High Court2002#2211 most cited

What is CIT v. Ram Mohan Kabra authority for?

Statutory provisions prescribing limitation periods must be applied strictly. Delay in filing an appeal can only be condoned for sufficient, bona fide, and well-substantiated cause, requiring due diligence from the appellant, and not merely on vague or general grounds.

52

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Ram Mohan Kabra · 257 ITR 773 · condonation of delay · sufficient cause · limitation period · appeal filing delay · strict application of limitation · section 249(3) · section 253(5) · bona fide reason · negligence in appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 249(3)Section 253(5)Section 271(1)(c)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144BSection 147

Issues it is cited on

section 256section 202section 66bona fide mistakesection 253(3)section 253(5)section 249(3)section 264stay petitionsection 249principal officersection 253

Judgments citing CIT v. Ram Mohan Kabra

New Higher Secondary School, Trivandrum vs. DCIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 54/COCH/2023[2015-16 (Qurt-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

…an vs. State of Kerala[1997] 7 SCC 556, the Apex Court again clarifies that the courts have no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds, even as it may harshly affect a particular party. The Hon’ble Court in CIT vs. Ram Mohan Kabra [2002] 257 ITR 773 (P&H) holding, on a review of judicial precedents, including Ramachandran (supra), that delay could be condoned only on good & sufficient reasons, represents the clear law in the matter. In G. Ramegowda, Major vs. Special Land Acquisition, 1988 AIR (SC) 897, it was held that deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fides on the part of the pa…

New Higher Secondary School, Trivandrum vs. DCIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 53/COCH/2023[2015-16 QTR 2]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

…an vs. State of Kerala[1997] 7 SCC 556, the Apex Court again clarifies that the courts have no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds, even as it may harshly affect a particular party. The Hon’ble Court in CIT vs. Ram Mohan Kabra [2002] 257 ITR 773 (P&H) holding, on a review of judicial precedents, including Ramachandran (supra), that delay could be condoned only on good & sufficient reasons, represents the clear law in the matter. In G. Ramegowda, Major vs. Special Land Acquisition, 1988 AIR (SC) 897, it was held that deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fides on the part of the pa…

New Higher Secondary School, Trivandrum vs. DCIT, Trivandrum

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 52/COCH/2023[2015-16 (QT1)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

…an vs. State of Kerala[1997] 7 SCC 556, the Apex Court again clarifies that the courts have no power to extend the period of limitation on equitable grounds, even as it may harshly affect a particular party. The Hon’ble Court in CIT vs. Ram Mohan Kabra [2002] 257 ITR 773 (P&H) holding, on a review of judicial precedents, including Ramachandran (supra), that delay could be condoned only on good & sufficient reasons, represents the clear law in the matter. In G. Ramegowda, Major vs. Special Land Acquisition, 1988 AIR (SC) 897, it was held that deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fides on the part of the pa…

Sujata Nayak, Rayagada vs. ITO, Rayagada

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 151/CTK/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack19 Jan 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2010-2011 2011 Smt.Sujata Sujata Nayak Nayak, W/O. Vs. Ito, Ito, Rayagada Rayagada Ward, Ward, Shri Lokanath Nayak, Omp Shri Lokanath Nayak, Omp Rayagada Road, Indira Nagar, 6Th Lane, Road, Indira Nagar, 6 Po;Dist: Rayagada Po;Dist: Rayagada Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Addpn 2024 P (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Ms Archita Nayak, Ar : Ms Archita Nayak, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 19/01 01/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 19/01 /01/2023 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld Cit(A), Berhampur, In Appeal No.0055/13 , Berhampur, In Appeal No.0055/13-14 Dated Dated 31.7.2014 For The Assessment Year Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. Ms Archita Nayak, Ms Archita Nayak, Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri Ld Ar Appeared For The Assessee & Shri S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared For The Revenue. S.C.Mohanty, Ld Sr Dr Appeared For The Revenue.

For Appellant: Ms Archita Nayak, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 143(3)

…R 471 (SC). 7. 'The provision relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanical manner (CIT v. Ram Mohan Kabra (2001) 257 ITR 773] 8. '...liberal construction of the sufficient cause while condoning delay has to be counter balanced by ensuring that the law of limitation which provides for definite consequence on the rights of the parties does not become ineffective.' [Cenzure Ind. (supra)”. P a g e 3 | 12 Assessment Year : 2010-2011 6. Basically, the facts remain that the…

Kokila Balaraman, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 13(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 718/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. N. Sanjay Gandhi, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…ipments Limited, is a third member decision which has the force of Special Bench decision and they are bound by the principles laid down in that case. 8. The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ram Mohan Kabra, 257 ITR 773, held that where the Legislature spells out a period of limitation and provides for power to condone the delay and such delay can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. The Calcutta Tribunal, in the case of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Taggas Industries Development Limited, 8…

B.Gokula Krishnan, Chennai vs. ACIT Non Corporate Circle 13(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 717/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr. N. Sanjay Gandhi, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)

…ipments Limited, is a third member decision which has the force of Special Bench decision and they are bound by the principles laid down in that case. 8. The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ram Mohan Kabra, 257 ITR 773, held that where the Legislature spells out a period of limitation and provides for power to condone the delay and such delay can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. The Calcutta Tribunal, in the case of the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Taggas Industries Development Limited, 8…

M/S Shri Janani Homes Pvt Ltd., Pondicherry vs. DCIT, Cps, TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 629/CHNY/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S. Shir Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry vs. DCIT-CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 628/CHNY/2021[2014-15-4TH QTR-24Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S Shri Jajani Homes, Coimbatore vs. DCIT-CPC(TDS), Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 627/CHNY/2021[2013-14-4TD QTR.)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 626/CHNY/2021[2013-14(III QTR-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry vs. DCIT, Coc-TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 625/CHNY/2021[2013-2014-II QTR.-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 624/CHNY/2021[2013-14-1ST QTR-26Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M//S Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd, Pondicherry vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 623/CHNY/2021[2013-14-(4TH QTR-24Q]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S Shri Janani Homes Pvt Ltd, Pondicheyya vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 622/CHNY/2021[2013-14 )3RDQTR-24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 621/CHNY/2021[2013-14(II Qtr.-24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

M/S Shri Janai Homes Pvt. Ltd, Pondicherry vs. DCIT, CPC, TDS, Ghaziabad

The appeal stands dismissed

ITA 620/CHNY/2021[2013-14(1 QTR-24Q)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.620 To 627/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.628 To 633/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2014-15) & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.634 To 638/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2015-16) && आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.639/Chny/2021 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Shri Janani Homes Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ No.9, Second Cross, Mugambigai Nagar, Centralized Processing Cell-Tds, Vs. Reddiyar Palayam, Pondicherry – 605 010. Ghaziabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./Pan/Tan Aancs-4620-C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri R. Venkata Raman (Ca)-Ld. Ar ""थ" की ओरसे/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. Cit) –Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 31-03-2022 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 31-03-2022 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri R. Venkata Raman (CA)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 234E

…case of Assistant Commissioner (CT) LTD, Kakinada & Ors. Vs M/s Glaxo Smith Kline Consumer Health Care Limited (2020) (36 G.S.T.L. 305). ITA Nos.620 to 639/Chny/2021 5.18 Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in the case of CIT Vs Ram Mohan Kabra (2002) (257 ITR 773)(Punjab & Haryana) has upheld the decision of Tribunal, in declining the condonation of delay of five days only, with the following ratio:- "3. The provisions relating to prescription of limitation in every statute must not be construed so liberally that it would have the effect of taking away the benefit accruing to the other party in a mechanic…

Smt. Prema Umed Mehta, Chennai vs. ACIT, Co. Circle - II (4), Chennai

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

ITA 2493/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri G. Manjunatha

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson,Addl. CIT
Section 133ASection 68

…delay of 24 days in filing the appeal. The ld.CIT(A) after considering relevant submissions of the assessee and also by following judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ram Mohan Kabra, (2002) 257 ITR 773 dismissed appeal filed by the assessee by rejecting the request for condonation of appeal. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the time of hearing, the ld.AR for the assessee submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee 4 I.T.A. No.2493/Chny/2019 without condoning the delay o…

M/S. Boutique Hotels India (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7042/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Shri Neel Kanth Khandelwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjog Kapoor, Sr. DR
Section 253(3)Section 80I

…iew of these deficiencies and shortcomings, the affidavit filed from the assessee’s side in support of request for condonation of delay in filing of this appeal lacks credibility. At this stage, we may refer to decision in the case of CIT vs. Ram Mohan Kalra 257 ITR 773 (P&H). It was held in this case, that delay can be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. In this case, Hon’ble High Court upheld the decision of ITAT refusing to condone delay of five days in filing of Revenue’s appeal because of the reasons that (a) affidavit of person who was dealing with fil…

Rakesh Kumar Jaiswal, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-47(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 4295/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini

For Appellant: Shri Shafiq Khan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.L. Anuragi, Sr. D.R
Section 5

…approach. Now in the present case delay is not of a few days but of 477 days. Besides, there is absolutely no valid explanation/ 6 ITA.No.4295/Del./2018 Shri Rakesh Kumar Jaiswal, Delhi. reason for the delay. In the case of CIT v. Ram Mohan Kabra [2002] 257 ITR 773, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held observed that where the Legislature spells out a period of limitation and provides for power to condone the delay as well, such delay can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. It is a settled principle of law that provisions relating to…

Ashok D Thakkar, Surat vs. Income Tax Officer Ward2(1), Surat

In the result, appeal of Assessee dismissed

ITA 86/SRT/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat25 Jul 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Meena

For Appellant: Shri Kiran K. Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Srinivas T. Bidni, CIT-DR

…such consideration may arise and such a case deserves a liberal approach. Now in the present case delay is not of a few days but of 1328 days. Besides, there is absolutely no valid explanation/reason for the delay. In the case of CITv. Ram Mohan Kabra [2002] 257 ITR 773, the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held observed that where the Legislature spells out a period of limitation and provides for power to condone the delay as well, such delay 7 ITA.No.86/SRT/2019 Sh. Ashok D. Thakkar, Surat. can only be condoned only for sufficient and good reasons supported by cogent and proper evidence. It is a settle…