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

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.

118 ITR 507Supreme Court of India1979#301 most cited

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.

268

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi · 118 ITR 507 · condonation of delay · sufficient cause · liberal interpretation · legal advice · mala fides · gross negligence · Section 253(5) · delay in filing appeal · Supreme Court.

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 250 Section 147 Section 143(1)Section 253(5)Section 271(1)(c)Section 148 Section 154

Issues it is cited on

section 253(5)section 80ib delay in filing appeal section 139(4)enduring benefit condonation of delay section 253 reasonable cause section 12aa section 24 registration under section 12a erroneous and prejudicial

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

Msk Project (India) Jv Ltd. Co.(Merged With Madhav Infra Project Ltd), Vadodara vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Vadodara

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 498/AHD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 Msk Project (India) Jv Ltd. Vs. (Merged With Madhav Infra Acit, Projects Ltd), Circle-4, 4, Madhav House, Near Baroda Panchratna Building, Subhanpura, Vadodara Pan : Aadcm 1157 C अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.01.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Iii, Baroda [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 09.08.2012 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts To Hold That No Appeal Lies Against Order Giving Effect To Findings Of Cit In Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. 2. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts Dismissing Appeal Challenging Addition Of Rs.9,90,00,052/- Whereas Supreme Court Awarding Rs. 26.34 Lakhs

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 250(6)Section 263

…Court. See Ramlal v. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. [AIR 1962 SC 361 : (1962) 2 SCR 762] , Shakuntala Devi Jain v. Kuntal Kumari [AIR 1969 SC 575 : (1969) 1 SCR 1006] , Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Nirmala Devi [(1979) 4 SCC 365 : 1979 SCC (Cri) 996 : (1979) 3 SCR 694] , Mata Din v. A. Narayanan [(1969) 2 SCC 770 : (1970) 2 SCR 90] and Collector (LA) v. Katiji [(1987) 2 SCC 107 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 172] , 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 fides on the part of the party or its counsel…

Shri. B.L. Nagendra Prasad, Bengaluru vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 1045/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian .S, JCIT DR

Section 115BSection 250Section 69A

…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 other decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank Et Others [2009] 9 SCC 733; and another decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ram Nath Sao alias Ram Nath Sahu Et Others Vs. Gobardhan Sao at Others, reported in [2002] 3 SCC 195 and another decision of the Ho…

M/S C.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 248/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

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

…appeals on 03.07.2023 alongwith appeals in penalty matters. Thus, there is no lethargy or negligence on the part of assessee in making delay in filing present appeals. Relying upon decisions in Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Nirmla Devi (1979) 118 ITR 507 (SC), Vijay Vishin Meghani Vs. DCIT (2017) 251 Taxmann 270 (Bombay HC) and Oracle India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2008) 13 DTR 372 (ITAT, Delhi), Ld. AR prayed to condone the delay in present matters. During arguments, when the Bench raised a pointed query to Ld. AR as to the period upto which the previous counsel handled assessee’s tax matters, Ld…

M/S C.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd., Bhopal vs. The ACIT, 1(2), Bhopal

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 247/IND/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jan 2024AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

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

M/S. Child Development Project Officer, Shivamogga vs. Income-Tax Officer, TDS Ward, Davangere

The appeals are partly allowed to the aforesaid extent

ITA 882/BANG/2023[26Q/Quarter-4/2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jan 2024

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Pai, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Nischal B, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.882 to 890/Bang/2023 Assessment Years : 2014-15 to 2016-17 The Child Development Project The Asst. Commissioner of Officer, Income-tax, Department of Women and Child Vs. Central Processing Cell, Kuvempu Road, TDS. Basavanagudi, Shivamogga. TAN : BLRC 03390 C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Hemant Pai, C.A Revenue by : Shri Nischal B, Addl. CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 04.01.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 09.01.2024 O R D E R PER BENCH All these appeal…

Rudrax Shine Logistic Private Limited, Bundi vs. ITO Ward Bundi, Bundi

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

ITA 581/JPR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Dec 2023AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 234ASection 40Section 68

…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 30BCAJ 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…

Rastogi Segma Furnitech Private Limited, Jaipur vs. ITO Ward 1(2), Jaipur

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

ITA 559/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 37

…ect, 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. 10. 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. 11. The Hon'ble Jaipur Bench o…

R.R. Earthworks, Bengaluru vs. DCIT, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 570/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Pai, CAFor Respondent: Dr. G Manoj Kumar, CIT, DR

Section 250

…n of delay is allowed. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Honb'le Apex Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition vs. MST.Katiji and Others [1987] 167 ITR 471 and in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd., Vs Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others 118 ITR 507. Further reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank & Others [2000] 9 Supreme Court Cases 733. 6. The appellant places reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT & Another Vs. ISRO Satellite Center, in ITA No. 532 of 20 and other batch…

Shri. Marate Venkateshkumar, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(6), Hubli

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

ITA 819/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri B. Venugopal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 250Section 69A

…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)(l 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 Marate Venkateshkumar, Bangalore Page 10 of 13 fide on the part of the party or its counsel the…

Everest Grande Commercial Premises Co-Op Society Limited, Mumbai vs. CPC ITO, 24 (1) (1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2487/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Jm & S Padmavathy S, Am आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.2487/Mum/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2014-15) Everest Grande Commercial बिधम/ Cpc/Ito-24(1)(1) 3Rd Floor, Piramal Premises Vs. Cts-46/34, Plot 3A Everest Chambers Lalbaugh, Grande Society, Mahakali Mumbai-400034. Caves Road, Andheri Kurla Road Andheri (East), Mumbai-400093. स्थधयी लेखध सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaaae5455A (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Dinesh Kukreja Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Meshram (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 25/10/2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Aby T. Varkey, Jm: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/(Nfac), Delhi Dated 19.06.2023 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. The Main Grievance Of The Assessee Is Against The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Without Admitting The Same On Grounds Of Delay.

For Appellant: Shri Dinesh KukrejaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Meshram (Sr. AR)

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

…e facts, mere denial of deduction, that too by way of an unreasoned adjustment by CPC u/s 143(1) of the Act, would result in gross miscarriage of justice. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi [1979] 118 ITR 507 has held that, what is to be looked into is whether there is any taint of mala fide or element of recklessness or ruse and if neither is present, legal advice honestly sought and actually given, must be treated as sufficient cause for condoning the delay. In the present case, there is no such malafide discernible from the facts placed before us.…

Ms Meenakshi Pre Fab Concrete, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 569/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore01 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Pai, A.RFor Respondent: Shri P.V. Pradeep Kumar, D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 40

…gly, the assessee filed a petition along with an affidavit and placing reliance on the following judgements: 1. Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. MST Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) 2. Concord of India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Nirmala Devi & Ors. 118 ITR 507 3. Radha Krishna Rai Vs. Allahabad Bank & Others (2000) 9 SCC 733. 4. CIT & Another Vs. ISRO Satellite Centre, in ITA No.532 of 2008 dated 28.10.2011 (Karn.) 5. Smt. Shakuntala Hegde, Legal Heir of Mr. Ramakrishna Hegde Vs. ACIT in ITA No.2785/Bang/2004 dated 25.4.2006 2.1 Thus, the contention of the ld. A.R. is that the technicalities to be igno…

Sri Channabasaveshwara Swamy Rural Education Society, Tumkur vs. Income-Tax Officer, (Exemptions) Ward-3, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 582/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Respondent: Shri Narendra Sharma

Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

…justice. 11. He also relied on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION Vs MST. KATIJI AND OTHERS reported in (1987) 167 ITR 471, in the case of CONCORD OF INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Vs SMT. NIRMALA DEVI AND OTHERS reported in 118 ITR 507 and decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/S. MELA RAM & SONS Vs CIT (PUNJAB) reported in 29 ITR 607. He also relied on the decision of recent judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Page 5 of 12 ITA Nos. 582 to 592/Bang/2023 WEST BENGAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENTFINANCE CORP, where Hon'ble Supreme Court held that delay…

Sarda Devi Chechani, Udaipur vs. ITO TDS, Udaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 127/JODH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Section 206CSection 5

…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. 5. The Hon'ble Jaipur Bench of ITA…

Sarda Devi Chechani, Udaipur vs. ITO TDS, Udaipu

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 126/JODH/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Section 206CSection 5

Sarda Devi Chechani, Udaipur vs. ITO TDS, Udaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 125/JODH/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur23 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Section 206CSection 5

Shri Gusai Baba Gaushala Samiti, Sikar vs. CIT(E), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 354/JPR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA Nos. 354 & 353/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYear :2023-24 Shri Gusai Baba Gaushala Samiti Gothra Tagelan Sikar Samiti, Gothra Tagelan, Sikar 332 023 cuke Vs. The CIT (Exemption) Jaipur LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABAAS 0888A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@Assessee by : Shri Sharvan Gupta, Advocate, Shri Shyam Sunder Goyal, Advocate. jktLo dh vksj ls@Re

For Appellant: Shri Sharvan Gupta, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik, CIT-DR

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

…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…

Mother Teresa Parmarth Shikshan Sansthan, Sikar vs. CIT(Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 352/JPR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 12ASection 5

…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…

Mother Teresa Parmarth Shikshan Sansthan, Sikar vs. CIT(E), Jaipur`

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 351/JPR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 12ASection 5

…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…

Jaikisan Samitrai Ganwani, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 798/PUN/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 143(3)

…eprived of an adjudication on merits unless it is found that the litigant deliberately delayed the filing of appeal. In that case, 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. 5. 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…

Jaikisan Samirtai Ganwani, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Pune

In the result, the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 797/PUN/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jul 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 143(3)