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.

Smt. Shilpa Gopala Reddy, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(3)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2072/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Sri.Venkatesh KumarFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Council for DR

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 246ASection 249(3)

…delay should be condoned. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst.Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt.Nirmala Devi and Ors. 118 ITR 507. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mst.Katiji (supra) has explained the principles that need to be kept in mind while considering an application for condition of delay. The Hon’ble Apex Court has emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical consideration. The Court has also explained that the litigant does not stand to…

Smt. Subbalakshmi, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1149/BANG/2008[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Dec 2019AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip, Junior to Shri K.V. Arvind

…nt in not filing the appeal within time. 3. In support of the plea for condonation of delay, the appellant places reliance on the judgement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CONCORD OF INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD., V. SMT. NIRMALA DEVI & ORS reported in 118 ITR 507 [SC] (copy enclosed as Annexure-1). Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Hon’ble ITAT, Bangalore “A” Bench in the case of GLEN WILLIAMS in ITA No.1078/Bang/2014 dated 07/08/2015 (copy enclosed as Annexure-2). 4. In these appeals, the contentions raised by the appellant while challenging the protective assessments made on the appellant a…

M/S Infycons Creative Software Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax CPC (TDS), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 324/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia & Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member

For Appellant: Miss. Pragna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N.Dhandapani, Addl.CIT

Section 200ASection 234E

…(A) should have appreciated the reason for delay. We observe that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v.Mst.Katili & Ors(1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co.Ltd., v.Smt. Nimala Devi and Ors.118 ITR 507.Mst.Katiji(supra), has explained the principles that need to be kept in mind while considering an application for condonation of delay. The Hon’ble Apex Court has emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The Court as also explained that a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging the appeal late. The C…

M/S. Infycons Creative Software Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC (TDS), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1719/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia & Smt.Beena Pillai, Judical Member

For Appellant: Miss. Pragna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.N.Dhandapani, Addl.CIT

Section 200ASection 234E

…(A) should have appreciated the reason for delay. We observe that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v.Mst.Katili & Ors(1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co.Ltd., v.Smt. Nimala Devi and Ors.118 ITR 507.Mst.Katiji(supra), has explained the principles that need to be kept in mind while considering an application for condonation of delay. The Hon’ble Apex Court has emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The Court as also explained that a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging the appeal late. The C…

Shri Narandar Pugalia, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward- 3(2)(3), Bengaluru

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1767/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A.K.Garodia(Smc)

For Appellant: Shri G.S Prashanth, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Ghale

Section 68

…tsoever if the delay is condoned. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition & Anr. Reported in 167 ITR 471 and in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co.Ltd., Smt.Nirmala Devi and Others reported in 118 ITR 507. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. reported in 334 ITR 269. Reliance is further placed on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT Vs Sanmac Motor Finance Ltd. reported in 2322 ITR 309 wherein the Court while condoning the…

Senco Gold Ltd As Successor to Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 11(2), Kolkata

ITA 839/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.838/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Senco Gold Ltd. As Successor To Vs. Cit-4, Kolkata. Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd. C/O Senco Gold Ltd., Diamond Prestige, 41A, A.J.C. Bose Road, 10Th Floor, Unit No.1001, Kolkata – 700017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakcs2962C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No. 839/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Senco Gold Ltd. As Successor To Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(2), Kolkata. Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd. C/O Senco Gold Ltd., Diamond Prestige, 41A, A.J.C. Bose Road, 10Th Floor, Unit No.1001, Kolkata – 700017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakcs2962C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These Two Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Kolkata & Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-4, Kolkata’S Orders Dated 27.08.18 & 22.02.18, Involving Proceedings U/S 263/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961; In Short ‘The Act’, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 10ASection 263

…court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties on merits in order to advance substantial justice. Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. I.T.A Nos.838 & 839/Kol/2018 Senco Gold Ltd. as successor to Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi & Ors. 118 ITR 507(SC) and [1987] (Suppl) 399 also held that a court ought not adopt a mechanical approach refusing to condone delay in question. We take into account the assessee’s condonation petition averments and the foregoing judicial precedents to observe that the impugned delay of 1250 days neither appears to be intentional nor deliberate but on account of w…

Senco Gold Ltd As Successor to Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. CIT - 4, Kolkata

ITA 838/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Shri S. S. Godara, Jm आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A Nos.838/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Senco Gold Ltd. As Successor To Vs. Cit-4, Kolkata. Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd. C/O Senco Gold Ltd., Diamond Prestige, 41A, A.J.C. Bose Road, 10Th Floor, Unit No.1001, Kolkata – 700017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakcs2962C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A No. 839/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11) Senco Gold Ltd. As Successor To Vs. Dcit, Circle-11(2), Kolkata. Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd. C/O Senco Gold Ltd., Diamond Prestige, 41A, A.J.C. Bose Road, 10Th Floor, Unit No.1001, Kolkata – 700017. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aakcs2962C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar Respondent By : Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. Cit सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 18/09/2019 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27/11/2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per Shri S. S. Godara: These Two Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2010-11 Arises From The Commissioner Of Income Tax-4, Kolkata & Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-4, Kolkata’S Orders Dated 27.08.18 & 22.02.18, Involving Proceedings U/S 263/143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961; In Short ‘The Act’, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT

Section 10ASection 263

…court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties on merits in order to advance substantial justice. Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. I.T.A Nos.838 & 839/Kol/2018 Senco Gold Ltd. as successor to Senco Gold Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi & Ors. 118 ITR 507(SC) and [1987] (Suppl) 399 also held that a court ought not adopt a mechanical approach refusing to condone delay in question. We take into account the assessee’s condonation petition averments and the foregoing judicial precedents to observe that the impugned delay of 1250 days neither appears to be intentional nor deliberate but on account of w…

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

…others v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (1988) 2 SCC 142 Bangalore; Ramlal, Motilal and Chhotelal v. Rewa Coalfield Ltd. (1962) 2 SCR 762; Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumar (1969) 1 SCR 1006; Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nirmala Devi (1979) 3 SCR 694; Lala Mata Din v. A. Narayanan (1970) 3 SCR 694; O.P. Kathpalia v. Lakhmir Singh (dead) and others (1984) 4 SCC 66; State of Nagaland v. Lipok (2005) 3 SCC 752; New India Insurane Co. Ltd. v. Shanti Misra (1975) 2 SCC 840; N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy AIR 1998 SC 3222; State of Haryana v. Chandra Mani and (1996) Page 13 of 22 ITA No.-7…

M/S Emsons Organics Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-1, Chandigarh

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 1088/CHANDI/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh13 Sept 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Addressing The Same, Parties Were Heard On The Delay Of 615 Days Pointed Out By The Registry In Each Of The Appeals Filed.

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chanderjeet Singh, CIT-DR

…ustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so.” 7.8 We may also refer to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi & ors. (1979) 118 ITR 507 (S.C) and the decision of the Hon'ble Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of Mahavir Prasad Jain Vs CIT 172 ITR 331 (MP) to support our conclusion. The Courts in the aforesaid decisions has clearly held that the ITAs 1088 to 1092/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2005-06, 2009-10 to 2012-13 Page 16 of 17 assessee cannot be made to suffer on account of the negli…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

In the result, the Cross objections are partly allowed in so far

ITA 1726/PUN/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2013 & 1726/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 Pan : Aaaca4074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ng of appeal. Similar to the cases under consideration, in that 3 Atlas Copco (India) Limited A.Yrs. 2008-09 and 2009-10 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. 4. 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…

Dy. CIT, Circle-8, Pune vs. Atlas Copco (India) Ltd., Pune

In the result, the Cross objections are partly allowed in so far

ITA 649/PUN/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Aug 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhuryआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.649/Pun/2013 & 1726/Pun/2014 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2008-09 & 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-8, Atlas Copco (India) Limited, Pune Vs. Sveanagar, Dapodi, Pune – 411 012 Pan : Aaaca4074D (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…ng of appeal. Similar to the cases under consideration, in that 3 Atlas Copco (India) Limited A.Yrs. 2008-09 and 2009-10 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. 4. 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…

M/S Ittina Properties Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1297/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalem/S.Ittina Properties Pvt. Ltd. No.1054, 3Rd Block, 7Th Main Koramangala, Bengaluru-560034. Pan: Aaci 3805 Q … Appellant Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Bengaluru. … Respondent Appellant By : Shri V.Chandrashekar, Advocate. Respondent By : Shri R.N.Siddappaji, Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 15/05/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/06/2019 O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Passed By The Cit(A) Dismissing The Assessee’S Petition For Condonation Of Delay In Filing The Appeal. The Learned Ar Submitted That The Cit(A) Has Erred In Dismissing The Assessee’S Appeal Without Providing Adequate Opportunity & Also Narrated Facts In The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Prayed That An Opportunity Be Granted To The Assessee To Reiterate The Submissions Made Before Lower Authorities With Page 2 Of 6 Substantive Evidences. Contra, Learned Dr Objected To The Submissions & Prayed That The Delay Is Inordinate & The Cit(A) Was Right In Dismissing The Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri V.Chandrashekar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N.Siddappaji, Addl.CIT(DR)

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 246ASection 40a

…lay 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 Appellant relies on another decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai vs. Allahabad Bank & Others [2009] 9 SCC 733 and CIT vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Limited [2011] 334 ITR 269 (SC).” 3. We, having considered the submissions of both the parties, facts and circumstances an…

Sh. Jaspal Singh S/O Sh. Swaran Singh, Amritsar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Amritsar

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 445/ASR/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 445/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Sh. Padam Bahl (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 144Section 154

…e its’ merits, is, without doubt, only as per the advice of the assessee’s legal counsel. The same should not 5 Jaspal Singh v. ITO therefore operate to the detriment of the assessee (refer: Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nirmala Devi and Ors. [1979] 118 ITR 507 (SC)). The appeal was accordingly admitted, and the hearing in the matter proceeded with. 4. On the merits, though the appeal raises three grounds, as under, the same, as per Sh. Bahl, project a single grievance: ‘1. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal)-2 Amritsar has grossly erred in confirming the order passed by Income Tax off…

Bangalore Development Authority, Bangalore vs. DDIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 789/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Years : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri S Annamalai, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)

Section 11Section 2(15)

…upport of its claim that the delay in filing of appeal should be condoned. 1. Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST. Katiji and Others (198) 167 ITR 471 2. Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507 3. Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank & Others [2009] 9 Supreme Court cases 733. 4. We have heard submission of the ld counsel for the assessee. Keeping in mind the principle laid down in the aforesaid decisions that interest of justice is Page 3 of 20 paramount and a liberal approach in such matters of condonation of delay should be adopted,…

M/S Ittiam Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-3(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2221/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P Boazassessment Year : 2012-13

For Respondent: Shri Smarak Swain, JCIT

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…f time. Reliance was placed by the Assessee on the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Ors. 118 ITR 507. Further the assessee also relied on decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai v. Allahabad Bank & Ors. (2009) 9 SCC 733 and Commissioner of Income-tax v. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. (2011) 334 ITR 269 (SC). At the outset, we observe that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Mst.…

M/S Wipro Chandrika Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

The appeal is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 788/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boazassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri P.V. Srinivasan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vikas K. Suryawamshi, Addl.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 143(3)Section 391

…order of CIT(Appeals). 6. At the outset, we observe that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. (1987) 167 ITR 471 and also in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Ors. 118 ITR 507.Mst. Katiji (supra), has explained the principles that need to be kept in mind while considering an application for condonation of delay. The Hon’ble Apex Court has emphasized that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations. The Court has also explained that a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging the appeal late. Th…

M/S Saisri Power Projects and Systems Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-6(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2014-15 is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2650/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Jason P Boazi.T. A. No.2650/Bang/2018 (Assessment Year : 2014-15) M/S. Saisri Power Projects & Vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Systems Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 6[1][1], No.81, Plot No.5D, Bangalore. Sushobit Residency, 2Nd Block 3Rd Stage, Basaveshwarnagar, Bangalore – 560 079. Pan : Aancs 3278 A Appellant Respondent : Assessee By Shri. Prashanth G. S, Ca Revenue By : Shri. Inder Solanki, Jcit Date Of Hearing : 05.12.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.01.2019 O R D E R

For Respondent: Assessee by Shri. Prashanth G. S, CA

Section 144Section 5

…he delay is condoned. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST Katiji reported in 167 ITR 471 and in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others reported in 118 ITR 507. Reliance is also placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd reported in 334 ITR 269. 9. We wish to place reliance on the decision of the Madras High Court in the case of CIT vs Sanmac Motor Finance Ltd reported in 322 Page 3 of 10 ITR 309 wherein the Court while…

Sh. Jasbir Singh S/O Tek Chand, Hoshiarpur vs. The Income Tax Officer, Hoshiarpur

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

ITA 600/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar01 Jan 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arora & Sh. N. K. Choudhryi.T.A. No. 600/(Asr)/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. J. K. Passi (Adv.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)

Section 143(3)Section 147

…T(A) which, where so done, would have made him aware of the order having been passed on 18.11.2014. Again, however, it would not be proper to penalize the assessee for the fault of his counsel (refer: Concord of India Ins. Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi [1979] 118 ITR 507 (SC)). We, therefore, consider it to be a fit case for condoning the delay. The hearing in the matter was accordingly proceeded with. 3. On merits, the sole issue arising in the instant case is the rate of depreciation eligible on forklift as being used for carrying out the work of Reliance Industries Ltd., with whom the asessee is in agreement…

The Graduates Co-Operative Society Limited, Shivamogga vs. The Income Tax Officer Ward-1, Shivamogga

In the result, appeals by the assessee for AY 2009-10 to 2012-13 are treated as allowed for statistical purpose while appeal for AY 2013-14 & 2014-

ITA 2787/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Dec 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Vice-

For Appellant: Smt.Soumya AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri.Karuppuswamy, Addl.CIT

Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

…lay is allowed. Reliance was 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 reliance was also placed on another decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank & 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). Reliance was also placed on the unreported deci…

Mulay Brothers Pvt. Ltd., Aurangabad vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 78/PUN/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune10 May 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Sunil GanooFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

…of his submissions the ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions : i. Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax and Another reported as 348 ITR 306 (SC); ii. Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others, 118 ITR 507 (SC); iii. DCIT Vs. M/s. Narayani Ispat Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 2127/Kol/2014 for assessment year 2010-11 decided on 30-08-2017 (Kol.-Trib.). 3. On the other hand Dr. Vivek Aggarwal representing the Department vehemently defended the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in confirming the levy of penalty. The ld. DR submitted that the asses…

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