Madhu Dadha v. ACIT

317 ITR 458High Court2009#2216 most cited

What is Madhu Dadha v. ACIT authority for?

While a liberal approach should be adopted when considering the condonation of delay in filing an appeal, the appellant must always demonstrate a sufficient cause to explain the delay. Failure to provide adequate reasons for the delay will result in the dismissal of the appeal.

52

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

Madhu Dadha v. ACIT · 317 ITR 458 · condonation of delay · delay in filing appeal · sufficient cause for delay · liberal approach · Section 249 · Section 249(3) · explanation for delay · dismissal of appeal

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 148ASection 1961Section 10(38)Section 133ASection 143(3)Section 144Section 144B

Issues it is cited on

section 248section 249(3)section 249delay in filing appealsection 249(2)assessee in defaultsection 194aadvance taxsection 200asection 234esection 200section 201

Judgments citing Madhu Dadha v. ACIT

SANT HARAJINDAR SINGH,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERITO-2(4), PILIBHIT-1, PILIBHIT

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

ITA 565/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshrasant Harajindar Singh V. Income Tax Officer-2(4), Trilok Singh Santpipariya Pilibhit-1 Karam Puranpur, Pilibhit, Uttar Income Tax Office, Near Pradesh-262122. Lic Office, Awas Vikas Colony, Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh-262001. Pan:Dlmps4218F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 04 08 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 07 08 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, CIT(DR)
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(2)Section 69A

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under Page 6 of 8 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has h…

TREXGEN PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. NFAC, DELHI JURI. AO- THE DY.CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 1210/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year : 2018-19

For Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 270A

…l. Since, in Form No.35, the assessee clams service of penalty order as 3.1.2022, thereby there is no delay in filing appeal. Further, we notice that the case laws relied on by the ld.CIT(A) of Madras High Court in the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT reported in 317 ITR 458 (Mad) held that liberal approach is to be adopted while deciding the condonation of delay, and the land-mark judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji, 167 ITR 471 (SC). Thus, in our considered view, the ld.CIT(A) is not correct in dismissing the appeal without affording an opportunity to exp…

KARIMNAGAR MILK PRODUCER COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KARIMNAGAR

ITA 1388/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 May 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 270A

…mil Nadu, (1995) 96 STC 263, 264\n(Madras)].\n\n5.5 In this regard, it will be relevant to examine how the Courts have dealt with\nsimilar cases. A reference may be made to decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras\nin the case of Madhu Dadha vs. ACIT reported 317 ITR 458 (Mad); (2010) 186\nTaxmann 8 (Madras). In this case, there was delay of 558 days in filing appeal. The\nHon'ble Court observed that though liberal approach is to be adopted while deciding\nthe condonation of delay, however, there is always a requirement of sufficient cause\nto explain the delay. In para 8, the Hon'ble Court examined the reasons a…

NIRMAL KUMAR AGRAWAL,JAIPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 4 , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1224/JPR/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur13 Feb 2025AY 2013-2014
For Appellant: Sh. Tarun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 133ASection 147Section 148Section 68Section 69C

…of Tamil Nadu, (1995) 96 STC 263, 264 (Madras)]. 5.5 In this regard, it will be relevant to examine how the Courts have dealt with similar cases. A reference may be made to decision of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of Madhu Dadha vs. ACIT reported 317 ITR 458 (Mad); (2010) 186 Taxmann 8 (Madras). In this case, there was delay of 558 days in filing appeal. The Hon'ble Court observed that though liberal approach is to be adopted while deciding the condonation of delay. however, there is always a requirement of sufficient cause to explain the delay. In para 8, the Hon'ble Court examined the reasons and h…

UMASHANKAR BHAGWATI PATWA,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE (DCIT, CIRCLE 20(1), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4893/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhailassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Ms. Mitali ParekhFor Respondent: Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, SR AR
Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 5Section 68

…Hemraj Onkarji Mali, [2009] 311 ITR (AT) 416 (Indore). In that case there was no reasonable cause for delay. The assessee had not taken proper steps to show that the cause is beyond reasonable doubt for the delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT. [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) ITA NO. 6240/M/07 Phoenix Mills Ltd, the court while dismissing the appeal noticed that the assessee had not explained the cause delay in filing the of appeal 8.12. In other words, where there is sufficient cause shown and the application for condonation of delay has been moved bonafide, the court would normally condone the delay but wher…

FUTURE MONEY SALES AND MARKETING PVT.LTD, A-28,NEAR BANKEY BIHARI TAMPEL RAJENDRA NAGER, BAREILLY-243001,,BAREILLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER -1(2),BAREILLY-NEW., BAREILLY-NEW

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

ITA 194/LKW/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriafuture Money Sales & Income Tax Officer-1(2) V. Marketing Pvt. Ltd Rampur Garden, Bareilly- A-28, Near Bankey Bihari New-243001. Tample, Rajendra Nagar, Bareilly-243001. Pan:Aabcf4395H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, Adv Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 10 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Devashish Mehrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(2)(b)Section 249(3)

…se where delay is of a few days and where assessee appeals for condonation of delay of only seven days on genuine ground of illness, delay should be condoned and appeal should be decided on merits - Held, yes. (emphasis supplied) 4) Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT [209] 317 ITR 458 (Mad. HC) 5) K.G.N.M.M.W.Educational Research & Analysis Society Vs. ITO [2015] 38 ITR(T) 623 (Jaipur—Trib) 6) Shree Balaji Woollen Mills’ Vs. ACIT [2012] 28 taxmann.com 198 (Del) 7) Abhishek Transtel Ltd Vs. DCIT [2014] 51 taxmann.com 17 (Hyd Trib) 8) CIT Vs. Ram Mohan kabra (2002) 257 ITR 723 (Panjab and Haryana), in this case, the Hon’ble High…

CELESTIAL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,AMBALAMUGAL vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), ERNALUAM

In the result, appeal is "Dismissed"

ITA 160/COCH/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhcelestial Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Dcit, Corporate Circle - 1(1) Aiswarya Towers Cr Building, Is Press Road Hoc Junction, Ambalamugal Vs. Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682302 [Pan: Aaccc6737F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Thomas Thomas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 249Section 249(3)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN Before Shri Satbeer Singh Godara, Judicial Member and Shri Amarjit Singh, Judicial Member Celestial Infrastructure (P) Ltd. DCIT, Corporate Circle - 1(1) Aiswarya Towers CR Building, IS Press Road HOC Junction, Ambalamugal vs. Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682302 [PAN: AACCC6737F] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri Thomas Thomas, CA Respondent by: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing: 16.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement: 23.10.2024 O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2009-10 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre…

VIJAY PRAKASH SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. I.T.O, WARD 4(4), JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 774/JPR/2023[A.Y. 2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jun 2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Chaudhary Addl. CIT
Section 249(3)

…ITD 513(Indore) decided that there was no reasonable cause for delay on part of revenue. This decision once taken cannot justify delay to file appeal. Hence, the reasonable cause for delay was not established. 10.9 In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) the learned Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under: 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has…

VIJAY KUMAR PAREKH,INDORE vs. WARD1(1) INDORE, INDORE

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

ITA 549/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivijay Kumar Parekh Ito-Ward -1(1) 406-407 Apollo Tower, 2Mg Indore Road Vs. Indore-452001 (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Afkpp 3277M Assessee By Shri Abhinava Jain & Sudhir Padliya, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24.04.2024

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249Section 70

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under- 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has held that, P…

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 231/RPR/2023[2016-17 (First Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not 'explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has held that,…

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 230/RPR/2023[2015-16 (Second Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not 'explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has held that,…

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 229/RPR/2023[2015-16 (First Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not 'explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has held that,…

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 228/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Fourth Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not 'explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has held that,…

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 227/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Third Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not 'explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has held that,…

NIKITA KINGRANI, DURG,DURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-TDS WARD, BHILAI, DURG

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in terms of our observations above

ITA 226/RPR/2023[2013-14 (Second Quarter)]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur11 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 249(3)

…lay on part of revenue. A conscious decision had been taken by senior officer of the rank of Commissioner not to file appeal. No proper steps were shown to establish that cause was beyond reasonable doubt for delay. In the case of Madhu Dadha Vs. ACIT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) Court while dismissing appeal noticed that assessee had not 'explained cause of delay in filing appeal. It held as under 14. At this juncture, we have to be guided by the judgment reported in [1990] 1 LLN 457 in the case of T.N.M. BANK LTD. v. APP. AUTY., SHOPS ACT. In that particular case, the Division Bench of this court has held that,…

SRD MANAGEMENT COMPANY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1237/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Srd Management Company, Vs Dcit, 304, 3Rd Floor, 44 Deenar Circle-22(2), Bhawan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi-110019. Pan-Aamcs3799K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Bawa Kanwarjit Singh, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023

…ellant has shown reason for delay on the last date of limitation period and thereafter for each day?] In the case of Ramlal and others Vs Rewa Coalfields Ltd (AIR 1962 SC 361), Tractors and Farm Equipments Ltd (ITAT Chennai 104 ITD 149) and MadhuDadha (Madras 317 ITR 458) it has been held that party has to show reason for delay on the last date of limitation period and thereafter for each day. Further, condonation of delay is not a matter of right. Court has to exercise the discretionary Jurisdiction. 6 Whether the inordinate delay was not due to negligence and inaction on the part of the appellant?] Reference is…

MUQEEM AHMAD,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(4), GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 1728/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…asonable diligence in prosecuting the appeal. Reliance in this regard is placed on decision in the case of Rankak & Ors, Vs Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 361, JCIT vs Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd. (ITAT, Chennai-TM) 104 ITD 149, Madhu Dadha vs ACIT (Mad) 317 ITR 458. Considering above facts and circumstances this appeal preferred by the appellant is treated as non-est being defective.” 9. I have considered the facts on record. It is not the case of Revenue that by filing appeal, the assessee has taken any advantage. But on the contrary, the assessee has put himself into risk of dismissal of appeal on limitat…

MUQEEM AHMAD,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(4), GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 1727/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

…asonable diligence in prosecuting the appeal. Reliance in this regard is placed on decision in the case of Rankak & Ors, Vs Rewa Coalfields Ltd. AIR 1962 SC 361, JCIT vs Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd. (ITAT, Chennai-TM) 104 ITD 149, Madhu Dadha vs ACIT (Mad) 317 ITR 458. Considering above facts and circumstances this appeal preferred by the appellant is treated as non-est being defective.” 9. I have considered the facts on record. It is not the case of Revenue that by filing appeal, the assessee has taken any advantage. But on the contrary, the assessee has put himself into risk of dismissal of appeal on limitat…

M/S. SNR RURAL EDUCATION TRUST,PUTTUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1161/BANG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Srinivas Kamath, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(1)

…sons for the delay in filing the appeal and relying on the decisions of CIT v Ram Mohan Kabra (P&H), JCIT v. Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd. [2007] 104 ITD 149 (Chennai) (TM), ITO v. Hemraj Onkarji Mali [2007] 108 TTJ 1061 (Indore), Madhu Dadha v. ACIT (2009) 317 ITR 458 (Mad), the CIT(A) denied condonation of inordinate delay of 523 days. The assessee is appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the CIT(A). 4. Before us the ld AR submitted that the assessee is used to receiving the correspondence from department manually and is new to e-portal. Therefore the assessee was not aware that the return has been…

M/S. ROSY ROYAL MINERALS LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 535/AHD/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Dec 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year: 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Thakwani, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 271(1)(c)

…further appeal and they are unaware of the consequences of ex-parte order of CIT[A). In this regard reliance may be placed on following judgments: 1. JCIT Vs. Tractors & Farm Equipments Ltd., [2007] 104 ITD 149 (Chennai)(TM). 2. Madhu Dadha Vs. ACJT, [2009] 317 ITR 458 (Mad.) 11. Considering the facts mentioned above the undersigned requests that the condonation application may not be entertained and should be rejected.” 6. We have heard both the parties and perused all the relevant material available on record. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR was asked to file the date-wise details as to why the del…

Showing 1–20 of 52 · Page 1 of 3

Madhu Dadha v. ACIT (317 ITR 458) — Cited in 52 Judgments | BharatTax