India in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Rash

12 SCC 649Reported decision2013#2083 most cited

What is India in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Rash authority for?

Courts should adopt a liberal, justice-oriented approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, understanding 'sufficient cause' as an elastic term to be applied pragmatically in each case, ensuring justice is served rather than legalizing injustice.

55

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2025.

Also referred to as

Esha Bhattacharjee · condonation of delay · sufficient cause · appeals · time-barred · section 249(2) Income-tax Act · section 249(3) Income-tax Act · liberal approach · justice-oriented · limitation period · delay in filing appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 115BBESection 142(1)Section 127Section 144Section 144CSection 153CSection 271(1)(c)Section 69

Issues it is cited on

section 124(1)section 124(3)(a)section 127(1)section 127(2)section 63section 124(3)section 10(23c)(iiiad)section 124percentage completion methodsection 120delay in filing appealsection 249(2)

Judgments citing India in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Rash

HITECH FLYASH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,TUTICORIN vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3105/CHNY/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3105/Chny/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. Hitech Fly Ash India Pvt Ltd., Acit, 2/101-5, Thiruchendur Road, Income Tax Office Muthiahpuram Tuticorn, Tirunelveli, Nellai City Centre Tuticorin-628005, Tiruchendup. Road Tamil Nadu Rahmath Nagar, Tirunelveli-627011 [Pan: Aabch 7093 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (" यथ"/Respondent)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ीमनुकुमारिग"र, "ाियकसद" एवं "ीएस. आर. रघुनाथा, लेखासद"केसम" BEFORE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.3105/Chny/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 v. HITECH FLY ASH INDIA PVT LTD., ACIT, 2/101-5, Thiruchendur Road, Income Tax Office Muthiahpuram Tuticorn, Tirunelveli, Nellai City Centre Tuticorin-628005, Tiruchendup. Road Tamil Nadu Rahmath Nagar, Tirunelveli-627011 [PAN: AABCH 7093 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (" यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" क! ओर से/ A…

BAJAJ DHARAMARTH TRUST,HISAR vs. ADIT CPC , BANGALORE

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3436/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No. 3436/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) Bajaj Dharmarth Trust Vs Assessing Officer Hospital Road Barwala, Assistant Director Of Income Hisar-125121 (Haryana) Tax, Pan: Aaaab6657M Cpc, Bangalore Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. V. K. Sabharwal, Adv& Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv Revenue By Sh. Piyushtripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2025 Order

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154

…1 ITA Nos. 3435& 3436/Del/2025 Bajaj Dharmarth Trust Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3436/DEL/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) Bajaj Dharmarth Trust Vs Assessing Officer Hospital Road Barwala, Assistant Director of Income Hisar-125121 (Haryana) Tax, PAN: AAAAB6657M CPC, Bangalore Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. V. K. Sabharwal, Adv& Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv Revenue by Sh. PiyushTripathi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26/11/2025 Date of Pronouncement 28/11/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U…

BAJAJ DHARMARTH TRUST,HISAR vs. ACIT, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 3435/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No. 3436/Del/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) Bajaj Dharmarth Trust Vs Assessing Officer Hospital Road Barwala, Assistant Director Of Income Hisar-125121 (Haryana) Tax, Pan: Aaaab6657M Cpc, Bangalore Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. V. K. Sabharwal, Adv& Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv Revenue By Sh. Piyushtripathi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/11/2025 Order

Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154

…1 ITA Nos. 3435& 3436/Del/2025 Bajaj Dharmarth Trust Vs. ACIT IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ NEW DELHI) BEFORE YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3436/DEL/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) Bajaj Dharmarth Trust Vs Assessing Officer Hospital Road Barwala, Assistant Director of Income Hisar-125121 (Haryana) Tax, PAN: AAAAB6657M CPC, Bangalore Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. V. K. Sabharwal, Adv& Sh. Rajiv Kumar, Adv Revenue by Sh. PiyushTripathi, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 26/11/2025 Date of Pronouncement 28/11/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U…

MEENU, GOVINDPUR, ALLAHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER CPC (NFAC, DELHI), DELHI

Appeal stands dismissed in- limine on the ground of limitation

ITA 135/ALLD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Meenu V. The Income Tax Officer Mig-23, Govindpur Cpc A-503, Satpushp Apartment Civil Lines, Allahabad Pan:Akfpm3770J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri S. K. Yogeshwar, Advocate Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 09.02.2023, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Nfac) For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Filed Her Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 05.08.2017, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.8,30,470/-. The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bangalore, Vide Intimation Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’), Dated 26.03.2019 Assessed The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.16,12,650/-.

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Yogeshwar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

…eserves to be dismissed in-limine, if not supported by sufficient reasons for the delay, in terms of section 253(5) of the Act. 4.1 The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Esha Bhattacharjee Vs Managing committee of Raghunathpur Academy and Ors, reported in 12 SCC 649 has framed certain ITA No.135/ALLD/2025 Page 4 of 8 criteria for condoning the delay in filing of appeal, which are as under: (a) Lack of bonafied imputable to a party seeking condonation of delay is a significant and relevant fact; (b) The concept of liberal approach has to encapsulate the conception of reasonableness and totally unfettered f…

AMBAR RESOURCES PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1569/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Varis Isani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 148Section 148ASection 249Section 69C

…3) and dismissed the appeal as time-barred, relying Ambar Resources Pvt. Ltd. vs. ITO Asst.Year –2018-19 - 4– on several judicial precedents such as P.K. Ramachandran v. State of Kerala (1997) 7 SCC 556, Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC 649, and Govt. of A.P. v. S. Prakash Rao (1982) 2 SCC 385, holding that law of limitation must be applied strictly and that delay of 285 days could not be condoned. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine. 6. The assessee is in appeal before us against the order passed by the CIT(Appeals) dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation. 7…

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 509/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

…v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 Fraud or\nmisrepresentation renders proceedings a nullity; fraud and justice cannot co-\nexist(Paper Book Page No. 7 to 21).\n(b) Burden of Proof in Delay Condonation\n• Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC 649\nApplicant must approach with clean hands and show bona fide reasons;\nsuppression disentitles relief (Paper Book Page No.22 to 32).\n• Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) – Liberal\napproach applies only when sufficient cause is shown truthfully (Paper Book\nPage No. 33 to 35).\n(c) Discretion is Equitable and Canno…

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 508/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

…v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 – Fraud or misrepresentation renders proceedings a nullity; fraud and justice cannot co- exist(Paper Book Page No. 7 to 21). (b) Burden of Proof in Delay Condonation • Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC 649 – Applicant must approach with clean hands and show bona fide reasons; suppression disentitles relief (Paper Book Page No.22 to 32). • Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) – Liberal approach applies only when sufficient cause is shown truthfully (Paper Book Page No. 33 to 35). (c) Discretion is Equitable and Cannot b…

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 507/JPR/2025[A.Y. 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

…v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 – Fraud or misrepresentation renders proceedings a nullity; fraud and justice cannot co- exist(Paper Book Page No. 7 to 21). (b) Burden of Proof in Delay Condonation • Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC 649 – Applicant must approach with clean hands and show bona fide reasons; suppression disentitles relief (Paper Book Page No.22 to 32). • Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) – Liberal approach applies only when sufficient cause is shown truthfully (Paper Book Page No. 33 to 35). (c) Discretion is Equitable and Cannot b…

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 506/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

…v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 – Fraud or misrepresentation renders proceedings a nullity; fraud and justice cannot co- exist(Paper Book Page No. 7 to 21). (b) Burden of Proof in Delay Condonation • Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC 649 – Applicant must approach with clean hands and show bona fide reasons; suppression disentitles relief (Paper Book Page No.22 to 32). • Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) – Liberal approach applies only when sufficient cause is shown truthfully (Paper Book Page No. 33 to 35). (c) Discretion is Equitable and Cannot b…

SONU DUSAD,JAIPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, 1, JAIPUR, JAIPUR

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 505/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 144CSection 153CSection 153DSection 250

…v. Govt. of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221 – Fraud or misrepresentation renders proceedings a nullity; fraud and justice cannot co- exist(Paper Book Page No. 7 to 21). (b) Burden of Proof in Delay Condonation • Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy (2013) 12 SCC 649 – Applicant must approach with clean hands and show bona fide reasons; suppression disentitles relief (Paper Book Page No.22 to 32). • Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) – Liberal approach applies only when sufficient cause is shown truthfully (Paper Book Page No. 33 to 35). (c) Discretion is Equitable and Cannot b…

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 764/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

…eeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause to exercise courts' discretion in its favour.” 33. In the case of Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy & Others, (2013) 12 SCC 649, this Court made the following observations: “21. From the aforesaid authorities the principles that can broadly be culled out are: 21.1. (i) There should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are obliged…

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANAGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 763/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

…eeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause to exercise courts' discretion in its favour.” 33. In the case of Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy & Others, (2013) 12 SCC 649, this Court made the following observations: “21. From the aforesaid authorities the principles that can broadly be culled out are: 21.1. (i) There should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are obliged…

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO ,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 762/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

…eeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause to exercise courts' discretion in its favour.” 33. In the case of Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy & Others, (2013) 12 SCC 649, this Court made the following observations: “21. From the aforesaid authorities the principles that can broadly be culled out are: 21.1. (i) There should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are obliged…

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 761/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

…eeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause to exercise courts' discretion in its favour.” 33. In the case of Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy & Others, (2013) 12 SCC 649, this Court made the following observations: “21. From the aforesaid authorities the principles that can broadly be culled out are: 21.1. (i) There should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are obliged…

HEENA G JAIN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT/DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2058/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2058/Chny/2025 िनधा7रण वष7 /Assessment Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Shrey Kumar M. Jain, C.A GHFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)

…eking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause to exercise courts' discretion in its favour.” 33. In the case of Esha Bhattacharjee v. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy & Others, (2013) 12 SCC 649, this Court made the following observations: “21. From the aforesaid authorities the principles that can broadly be culled out are: 21.1. (i) There should be a liberal, pragmatic, justice-oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise injustice but are oblige…

SHREE SHANTANU VIDHYAPEETH SOCIETY ,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 640/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi**

Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

…an order of the High Court therein condoning delay, principles to guide the consideration of an application for condonation of delay were culled out in Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy [Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649: (2014) 1 SCC (Civ) 713: (2014) 4 SCC (Cri) 450: (2014) 2 SCC (L&S) 595]. One of the factors taken note of therein was that substantial justice is paramount [Para 21.3 of Esha Bhattacharjee [Esha Bhattacharjee v. Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649: (2014) 1 SCC (Civ) 713: (2014) 4 SCC (Cri) 450: (2014) 2 SCC (L&S) 595]].* - *38. In N.L…

S.S. RANGASAMY RAJA,RAJAPALAYAM vs. ITO, TDS WARD,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1744/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1743 & 1744/Chny/2025 िनधा>रण वष> /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 200A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद एवं माननीय अिमताभ शु'ा, लेखा सद के सम) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.1743 & 1744/Chny/2025 िनधा>रण वष> /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 S.S. Rangasamy Raja, The Income Tax Officer, 124, Madasam Koil Street, Vs. TDS Ward, Rajapalaam – 626 117. Chennai. [TAN: CHES21695C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथI की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate KLथI की ओर से /Re…

S. S. RANGASAMY RAJA,RAJAPALAYAM vs. ITO, TDS WARD,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 1743/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri Hon’Ble Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos.1743 & 1744/Chny/2025 िनधा>रण वष> /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CIT
Section 200A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘सी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI माननीय "ी मनु कुमार िग"र, "ाियक सद एवं माननीय अिमताभ शु'ा, लेखा सद के सम) BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI HON’BLE AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.1743 & 1744/Chny/2025 िनधा>रण वष> /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 S.S. Rangasamy Raja, The Income Tax Officer, 124, Madasam Koil Street, Vs. TDS Ward, Rajapalaam – 626 117. Chennai. [TAN: CHES21695C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथI की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate KLथI की ओर से /Re…

INSTITUTE OF NEPHROUROLOGY,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE - 01, UNITY BUILDING ANNEXE

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and restored to the file of the ld

ITA 337/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Shreesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

…n and then if sufficient cause is assigned, then the delay must be condoned. 21. In the present case, there is no doubt about the bonafides of the assessee in showing a sufficient cause. 22. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Isha Bhattacharjee [2013] 12 SCC 649 has categorically held that an application for condonation of delay should not be dealt with in a routine manner on the basis of individual philosophy which is basically subjective. Further no precise formula can be laid down, but has to be decided on the basis of sufficient cause shown in each case. 23. In the present case, it is a subjective op…

INSTITUTE OF NEPHROUROLOGY,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION CIRCLE 1, UNITY BUILDING

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and restored to the file of the ld

ITA 336/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Shreesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

…n and then if sufficient cause is assigned, then the delay must be condoned. 21. In the present case, there is no doubt about the bonafides of the assessee in showing a sufficient cause. 22. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Isha Bhattacharjee [2013] 12 SCC 649 has categorically held that an application for condonation of delay should not be dealt with in a routine manner on the basis of individual philosophy which is basically subjective. Further no precise formula can be laid down, but has to be decided on the basis of sufficient cause shown in each case. 23. In the present case, it is a subjective op…

Showing 1–20 of 55 · Page 1 of 3