Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(3), Section 250, Section 147, Section 143(1), Section 253(5), Section 271(1)(c).

Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others (118 ITR 507)

Q: What is Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others authority for?

For condoning delay, the term 'sufficient cause' must be interpreted liberally and purposively to advance justice. Delay not tainted by mala fides, gross negligence, or recklessness, and based on honestly obtained legal advice, constitutes sufficient cause.

Q: How many judgments cite Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others?

268 judgments on BharatTax cite Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others (118 ITR 507), spanning 2014 to 2026.

G P Electropnumatics, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 418/PUN/2021[2013-14 (24Q Qtr -4)]Status: HeardITAT Pune19 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Ms. Vaishnavi BadweFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh P. Murkunde

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

…is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal. Similar to the cases under consideration, in that case too, delay of 2984 days crept in due to improper legal advice. Relying on Concord of India Ins. Co. Limited VS Nirmala Devi (1979) 118 ITR 507 (SC), the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court condoned the delay. 7. In yet another case in Anil Kumar Nehru and Another vs. ACIT (2017) 98 CCH 0469 BomHC, there was a delay of 1662 days in filing the appeal. Such a delay was not condoned by the Hon’ble High Court. In further appeal, condoning the delay, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anil Kumar…

G P Electropnumatics, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 421/PUN/2021[2013-14 (26Q Qtr -4)]Status: HeardITAT Pune19 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Ms. Vaishnavi BadweFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh P. Murkunde

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

…is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal. Similar to the cases under consideration, in that case too, delay of 2984 days crept in due to improper legal advice. Relying on Concord of India Ins. Co. Limited VS Nirmala Devi (1979) 118 ITR 507 (SC), the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court condoned the delay. 7. In yet another case in Anil Kumar Nehru and Another vs. ACIT (2017) 98 CCH 0469 BomHC, there was a delay of 1662 days in filing the appeal. Such a delay was not condoned by the Hon’ble High Court. In further appeal, condoning the delay, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anil Kumar…

G P Electropnumatics, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals are allowed

ITA 419/PUN/2021[2013-14 (26Q Qtr -2)]Status: HeardITAT Pune19 Sept 2022

Bench: Shri R.S.Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury

For Appellant: Ms. Vaishnavi BadweFor Respondent: Shri Ramesh P. Murkunde

Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

…is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal. Similar to the cases under consideration, in that case too, delay of 2984 days crept in due to improper legal advice. Relying on Concord of India Ins. Co. Limited VS Nirmala Devi (1979) 118 ITR 507 (SC), the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court condoned the delay. 7. In yet another case in Anil Kumar Nehru and Another vs. ACIT (2017) 98 CCH 0469 BomHC, there was a delay of 1662 days in filing the appeal. Such a delay was not condoned by the Hon’ble High Court. In further appeal, condoning the delay, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anil Kumar…

Reetesh Kumar, Baran vs. ITO Wad Baran, Baran

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

ITA 231/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sharvan Kumar GuptaFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, JCIT

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 56

…rect, if caused a delay, has been held to be reasonable and sufficient cause in these cases also. Kindly refer N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishna Murthy(1998) 7 SCC 123 published in 30 BCAJ 922, Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Anothers 118 ITR 507. That it is also settled that for the mistake of the Counsel, the party cannot be suffered. Reliance on Mahaveer Prasad Jain v/s CIT, 172 ITR 331(MP), Concord India Insurance Co. Ltd v/s Smt. Nirmala Devi, 118 ITR 507(SC). Kripa Shankar v/s CIT/CWT 181 ITR 183(All), N. Balakrishnan v/s M. Krishanmurthy 7 SSC123. 7. The Hon'ble Jaipur Bench of ITA…

M/S. Hassan Power Supply Company Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 500/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore28 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Joseph Varghese, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Advocate/Standing Counsel for Dept

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…'ble appellate authority.” 4. In this regard, the assessee placed reliance on the following cases: (i) Collection, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others [1987] 167 ITR 147 (SC). (ii) Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507 (SC). (iii) Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank and Others (2000) 9 SC cases 733. 5. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay by stating that the delay is nothing but negligence and inaction on the part of the assessee and that there exists no sufficient / good reason for condoning the delay. Aggrieved, the assessee is in appe…

M/S. Bhoolakshmi Estates Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 499/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Bhoolakshmi Estates Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. No.1, Grant Road, Cunningham Road, Income Tax, Bengaluru – 560 001. Central Circle – 2(1), Pan : Aaacb 8624N Bengaluru. Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Joseph Varghese, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Baseganni, Addl.CIT(OSD)(ITAT)

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…'ble appellate authority.” 4. In this regard, the assessee placed reliance on the following cases: (i) Collection, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others [1987] 167 ITR 147 (SC). (ii) Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507 (SC). (iii) Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank and Others (2000) 9 SC cases 733. 5. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay by stating that the delay is nothing but negligence and inaction on the part of the assessee and that there exist no sufficient / good reason for condoning the delay. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal…

M/S. Kanna Investments Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 490/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2017-18 M/S. Kanna Investments Ltd., Dcit, Vs. No.17, Sankey Road, Central Circle – 2(1), Bengaluru – 560 020. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaack 8373 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Joseph Varghese, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Susan Dolores George, CIT(OSD)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 41(1)

…'ble appellate authority.” 4. In this regard, the assessee placed reliance on the following cases: (i) Collection, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others [1987] 167 ITR 147 (SC). (ii) Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507 (SC). (iii) Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank and Others (2000) 9 SC cases 733. 5. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without condoning the delay by stating that the delay is nothing but negligence and inaction on the part of the assessee and that there exist no sufficient / good reason for condoning the delay. Aggrieved the assessee is in appeal…

Mansi Finance Chennai Limited, Chennai vs. The ACIT, CC 4(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 109/CHNY/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jul 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 108 & 109/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prithvi Chopda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

…ng appeals are set out in a number of pronouncements of this Court. See : Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal v. Rewa Coalfield Ltd.(1962)(2 SCR 762); Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari(1969)(1 SCR 1006); Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Nirmala Devi(1979)(3 SCR 694); Lala Mata Din v. A. Narayanan(1970)(2 SCR 90); Collector, Land Acquisition v. Katiji etc. There is, it is true, no general principle saving the party from all mistakes of its counsel. If there is negligence, deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fide on the part of the party or its counsel there is no reason why the opposite side should be…

Mansi Finance Chennai Limited, Chennai vs. The ACIT, CC-4(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 108/CHNY/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 108 & 109/Chny/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Prithvi Chopda, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT

…ng appeals are set out in a number of pronouncements of this Court. See : Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal v. Rewa Coalfield Ltd.(1962)(2 SCR 762); Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari(1969)(1 SCR 1006); Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Nirmala Devi(1979)(3 SCR 694); Lala Mata Din v. A. Narayanan(1970)(2 SCR 90); Collector, Land Acquisition v. Katiji etc. There is, it is true, no general principle saving the party from all mistakes of its counsel. If there is negligence, deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fide on the part of the party or its counsel there is no reason why the opposite side should be…

Deepak Bajaj, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 40(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 569/KOL/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 263

…is arguments, the ld. Counsel of the assessee relied on the following decisions: i) M/s Midas Compounds vs. ACIT in ITA No. 288/Coch/2017 for AY 2006-07 dated 25.06.2018 ii) Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi & Ors. Reported in [1979] 118 ITR 507 (SC) iii) Mercedes Benze Education Academy vs. ITO in ITA No. 745/Pun/2015 v) Vijay Visin Meghani vs. DCIT (2017) 398 ITR 250 (Bom) vi) CIT vs. KSP Shanmugavel Nadai & Ors. (153 ITR 596 ) (Madras- High Court) vii) Orbit Dealmark Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO in ITA No. 513/Kol/2020 for AY 2012-13 dated 22.04.2022 wherein the Co-ordinate Bench has condone…

R G Patil & Company, Haveri vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

In the result, these 2 appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 352/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S.V Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K, JCIT (DR)

Section 271(1)(c)

…benches have been considered. 1. Judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of N.Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (AIR 1998 SC 3222) 2. Hon 'ble Apex Court in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and others, reported in (1979) 118 ITR 507(5C) 3. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan Vs. Krishnamurthy, reported in AIR 1998 SC 3222. T 4. Mumbai Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Y.P. Trivedi vs. JCIT in ITA No. 5994/Mum/2010 dated 11/07/2012 5. ITAT, Delhi Benches in the case of Vishu Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Department of Income Tax in ITA No. 2765 and 3703/Del/2011 d…

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1111/BANG/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2010-11 M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., The Deputy 3Rd Floor, Bmtc Commissioner Of Complex, Income Tax, K H Road, Circle – 1 [1][2], Shanti Nagar, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 027. Pan: Aaacb4881D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate : Shri Sumer Singh Meena, Cit Revenue By Dr Date Of Hearing : 25-04-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29-04-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 26/02/2019 Passed By The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2010-11 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals), Passed Under Section 250 Of The Act In So Far As It Is Against The Appellant Is Opposed To Law, Equity, Weight Of Evidence, Probabilities & The Facts & Circumstances In The Appellant'S Case. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Is Not Justified In Refusing To Admit The Appeal Of The Appellant On The Grounds That Delay In Filing Of The Appeal Cannot Be Condoned On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate

Section 234BSection 234DSection 250

…and dispose-off the matter based on the merits of the matter and not on the basis of technicalities. (i) Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC); (ii) Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507 (SC); (iii) Radha Krishna Rai vs. Allahabad Bank & Others [2009] 9 SCC 733; (iv) CIT vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Limited [2011] 334 ITR 269 (SC); (v) Improvement Trust, Ludhiana v. Ujagar Singh & Ors.in Civil Appeal No. 2395 of 2008 (SC); (vi) Ram Nath Sao v. Gobardhan Sao reported in AIR 2002 SC 1201; The asses…

Shri Muniyappa Narashimaiah, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(2)(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assesseeis treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 26/BANG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Ms. S. Padmavathyassessment Year :2013-14 Shri. Muniyappa Narashimaiah, Vs. Ito, No.120/1, Hessarghatta Main Road, Ward – 6(2)(3), Bhuvaneshwari Nagar, T Dasarahalli, Bengaluru. Bengaluru – 560 057. Pan : Abmpn 5245 R Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Mahesh Kumar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 25.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.04.2022 O R D E R Per N. V. Vasudevan: . V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. Mahesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshini Mishra, Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 10(37)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54Section 54B

…ondonation of delay is allowed. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case ofCollector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Nirmala Devi and Page 5 of 9 Others 118 ITR 507.Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank & Others [2000] 9 Supreme Court Cases 733. 8. Learned DR opposed the prayer of the assessee for condoning of delay and in this regard placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of T. Lakshmi CMP No.10954/2021 wherein the Hon’ble Madras High Court refused to condone delay in fi…

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1263/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2009-10 Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Dcit, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Bmtc Complex, Circle – 11(2), K H Road, Shanti Nagar, Bengaluru. Bengaluru-560 027. Pan : Aaacb 4881 D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. A. Shankar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 01.04.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.04.2022 O R D E R Per N V Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. A. Shankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 250

…and dispose-off the matter based on the merits of the matter and not on the basis of technicalities. (i) Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC); (ii) Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507 (SC); Page 9 of 22 (iii) Radha Krishna Rai vs. Allahabad Bank & Others [2009] 9 SCC 733; (iv) CIT vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Limited [2011] 334 ITR 269 (SC); (v) Improvement Trust, Ludhiana v. Ujagar Singh & Ors.in Civil Appeal No. 2395 of 2008 (SC); (vi) Ram Nath Sao v. Gobardhan Sao reported in AIR 2002 SC 1…

Shri. Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(2)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 680/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Asst.Commissioner Of K. Janatha Colony, Income Tax, Bidadi Hobli, Vs. Circle - 3(2)(1) Ramnagara Dist., Bengaluru Bengaluru Pan – Anaps2762E Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Assessee by Sri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43ASection 43B

…rwise it cause un-bearable hardship to the assessee. For this, he relied on the following judgements: i. Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC); ii. Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507 (SC); iii. Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank & Others [2009] 9 SCC 733; iv. CIT Vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Limited [2011] 334 ITR 269 (SC); v. Improvement Trust, Ludhiana Vs. Ujagar Singh & Ors. in Civil Appeal No.2395 of 2008 (SC); vi. Ram Nath Sao Vs. Gobardhan Sao reported in AIR 2002 SC 1201; 4. On the…

Sri. Suhas Suresh Shet, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-2(1), Bengaluru

In the result, these two assessee’s appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 608/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

…ng appeals are set out in a number of pronouncements of this Court. See : Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal v. Rewa Coalfield Ltd.(1962)(2 SCR 762); Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari(1969)(1 SCR 1006); Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Nirmala Devi(1979)(3 SCR 694); Lala Mata Din v. A. Narayanan(1970)(2 SCR 90); Collector, Land Acquisition v. Katiji etc. There is, it is true, no general principle saving the party from all mistakes of its counsel. If there is negligence, deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fide on the part of the party or its counsel there is no reason why the opposite side should be…

Sri. Suhas Suresh Shet, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-2(1), Bengaluru

In the result, these two assessee’s appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 607/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

…ng appeals are set out in a number of pronouncements of this Court. See : Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal v. Rewa Coalfield Ltd.(1962)(2 SCR 762); Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari(1969)(1 SCR 1006); Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. V. Nirmala Devi(1979)(3 SCR 694); Lala Mata Din v. A. Narayanan(1970)(2 SCR 90); Collector, Land Acquisition v. Katiji etc. There is, it is true, no general principle saving the party from all mistakes of its counsel. If there is negligence, deliberate or gross inaction or lack of bona fide on the part of the party or its counsel there is no reason why the opposite side should be…

M/S. Tejas Networks Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 582/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

…elay is allowed. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507. Further, the assessee relies on another decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank Et Others [2000] 9 Supreme Court Cases 733 and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation limited (2011) 334 ITR 269 (SC). The assessee placed reliance on the decision of th…

M/S Tejats Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1674/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

…elay is allowed. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507. Further, the assessee relies on another decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank Et Others [2000] 9 Supreme Court Cases 733 and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation limited (2011) 334 ITR 269 (SC). The assessee placed reliance on the decision of th…

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 694/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs

Section 154

…elay is allowed. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507. Further, the assessee relies on another decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank Et Others [2000] 9 Supreme Court Cases 733 and Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation limited (2011) 334 ITR 269 (SC). The assessee placed reliance on the decision of th…

Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others

What is Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others authority for?

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others

G P Electropnumatics, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

G P Electropnumatics, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

G P Electropnumatics, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, CPC-TDS, Ghaziabad

Reetesh Kumar, Baran vs. ITO Wad Baran, Baran

M/S. Hassan Power Supply Company Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

M/S. Bhoolakshmi Estates Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

M/S. Kanna Investments Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle -2(1), Bangalore

Mansi Finance Chennai Limited, Chennai vs. The ACIT, CC 4(1), Chennai

Mansi Finance Chennai Limited, Chennai vs. The ACIT, CC-4(1), Chennai

Deepak Bajaj, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 40(1), Kolkata

R G Patil & Company, Haveri vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle, Belagavi

M/S. Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle - 1(1)(2), Bangalore

Shri Muniyappa Narashimaiah, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 6(2)(3), Bangalore

Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Ltd., Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

Shri. Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 3(2)(1), Bangalore

Sri. Suhas Suresh Shet, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-2(1), Bengaluru

Sri. Suhas Suresh Shet, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation, Ward-2(1), Bengaluru

M/S. Tejas Networks Limited, Bengaluru vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ltu, Circle-1, Bengaluru

M/S Tejats Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax Central, Bangalore

Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore