How many judgments cite Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy?

47 judgments on BharatTax cite Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (12 SCC 693), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 250, Section 142(1), Section 144, Section 147, Section 148, Section 143(3).

Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy

12 SCC 693Reported decision2012#2431 most cited

What is Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy authority for?

When considering an application for condonation of delay, courts must adopt a liberal, pragmatic, and justice-oriented approach, understanding 'sufficient cause' in its proper spirit to serve the ends of justice and avoid legalizing injustice.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy · 12 SCC 693 · condonation of delay · sufficient cause · liberal approach · substantial justice · Section 249(3) · Section 250 · delay in filing appeal · reasonable cause · Section 5 Limitation Act

Sections most often in play

Section 250 Section 142(1)Section 144 Section 147 Section 148 Section 143(3)Section 69A Section 249(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 138 section 249(3)delay in filing appeal reason to believe reasonable cause section 271b condonation of delay addition under section 68 unexplained money section 142(1)section 69a section 80

Judgments citing Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy

Jayesh Hirji Savla, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle -5(1), Mumbai

ITA 3243/MUM/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt Renu Jauhri

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147

…atter and had no bona fide or reasonable explanation for delay in filing proceedings-High Court condoned delay of 2984 days in filing appeals-Assessee's Appeals allowed. Held 5. Similarly the Hon'ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injust…

Jayesh Hirji Savla, Mumbai vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income-Tax Central Circle -5(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3242/MUM/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt Renu Jauhri

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147

…ter and had no bona fide or reasonable explanation for delay in filing proceedings-High Court condoned delay of 2984 days in filing appeals-Assessee's Appeals allowed. Held “ 5. Similarly the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injus…

Fancy Rehabilitation Trust, Mumbai vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2719/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhfancyrehabilitationtrust, Vs. I T O (Exem), Ward 2(3), Cumballa Hill,Mtnl Te Sewri Cross Road, Near Building, Pedderroad, Bdd Chawl No. 9, Drgopalrao D Marg, Sewri (W), Mumbai–400026. Mumbai-400015. Pan/Gir No. Aaatf0598C (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)

…ound that there 7 Fancy Rehabilitation Trust, Mumbai is a reasonable cause explained and there is no benefit is derived in causing delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B. Madhuri Goud vs. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injus…

Pukhraj Bhomaji Mutha, Mumbai vs. ITO-19(2)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 2150/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaravs. Ito -19(2)(5), Pukhraj Bhomaji Mutha, Piramal Chambers, 1605, Siddesh Darshan, Lalbaug, 10Th Khetwadi, Mumbai-400012. Mumbai – 400004. Pan/Gir No. Aacpm4077H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 144Section 148

…er and had no bona fide or reasonable explanation for delay in filing proceedings-High Court condoned delay of 2984 days in filing appeals-Assessee's Appeals allowed. Held “ 4. Similarly the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the 6 Pukhraj Bhomaji Mutha, Mumbai following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 injustic…

Iei Shareholding (Personal Development -1987) Trust, Mumbai vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2222/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Jul 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Omkareshwar Chidaravs. Ito Ward 22(2)(1), Iei Shareholding(Personal Piramal Chambers, Development -1987) Trust, Lalbaugh, Ion House, 4Th Floor, Mumbai-400011. Dr. E Moses Road, Near Famous Studio, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai-400011. Pan/Gir No. Aaati0093D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 164(1)Section 167B

…ntents of the condonation application found that there is a reasonable cause explained and there is no benefit is derived in causing delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B. Madhuri Goud vs. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injus…

Prakash Sharma, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Alwar

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

ITA 184/JPR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Jun 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SHRI MANISH BORAD (Accountant Member), DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Addl.CIT)

Section 144Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Jh euh"k cksjkM] ys[kk lnL; ,oaMk0 ,l- lhrky{eh]U ;kf;d lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI MANISH BORAD, AM &DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 184/JPR/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2012-13 Prakash Sharma cuke Income Tax Officer, 205, Balaji Tower, 7-Mahal Yojna, Vs. Alwar. Jagatpura, Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.:ARAPS0075L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Sh. S.L. Poddar (Adv.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by: Smt. Monisha Chaudhary (Ad…

Mahendra Mamtora, Mumbai vs. ITO 30(2)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1119/MUM/2024[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Jun 2024AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt. Renu Jauhrii T A. No. 1119/Mum/2024 (A.Y.2011-12)

Section 147Section 148Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)Section 68

…tion application found that there is a reasonable cause explained and there is no benefit is derived in causing delay in filing appeal 6 Mahendra Mamtora before the CIT(A). The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B. Madhuri Goud vs. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injus…

K & P Enterprises, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 22(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1318/MUM/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayi T A. No. 1318, 1319 & 1320/Mum/2024 (A.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2013-14)

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 271(1)(c)

…tronically as per the amendment is effective from 01.03.2016. Further we find that there is no benefit is derived in causing delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of B. Madhuri Goud vs. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injust…

Shri Virendra Mughumal Jangla, Dubai-Uae vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 57, Mumbai

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

ITA 4429/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Girish Agrawali T A. No. 4429/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2012-13) Cit(A) – 57, Shri.Virendra Mughumal Vs Aayakar Bhavan, Jangla,107, Sikkat Al . M.K.Road, Khalil Road, Near Down Mumbai-400020. Town Hotel, Ismail Abdul Ahmed Bldg, Shop No. 2, Al Buteen Fikree Market, Nariman Point S O, Deira Dubai Uae. Represented By Pramod Gupta & Associates, Chartered Accountants. 303,Indore Trade Center, 3/2,Sardar Patel Marg, Chhoti Gwaltoli, Indore. Madhya Pradesh. Pan/Gir No. Anzpm5534B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Assessee By Shri.Bhuwan Modi.Ar Revenue By Ms.Rajeshwari Menon.Sr.Dr

Section 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, “F” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I T A. No. 4429/MUM/2023 (A.Y. 2012-13) CIT(A) – 57, Shri.Virendra Mughumal Vs Aayakar Bhavan, Jangla,107, Sikkat Al . M.K.Road, Khalil Road, Near Down Mumbai-400020. Town Hotel, Ismail Abdul Ahmed Bldg, Shop No. 2, Al Buteen Fikree Market, Nariman Point S O, Deira Dubai UAE. Represented by Pramod Gupta And Associates, Chartered Accountants. 303,Indore Trade Center, 3/2,Sardar Patel Marg, Chhoti Gwaltoli, Indore. Madhya Pradesh. PAN/GIR No. ANZPM5534B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant)…

Mukhtar Ramzan Shaikh, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6, Vapi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 629/SRT/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Dec 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Dr. A. L. Sainiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.628 & 629/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: (2010-11 & 2011-12) (Physical Hearing) Mukhtar Ramzan Shaikh Income Tax Officer, 303, Imran Mension, Opp. Vs. Ward-6, Vapi, Income Tax Office, Suman Auto, Godal Nagar, Room No.808, Fortune Saquare- Vapi-396191 Ii, Daman Road, Chala Vapi- 396191 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Awlps 0991 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69ASection 80C

…h the party acts and behaves. From the conduct, behaviour and attitude of the assessee it cannot be said that assessee had been absolutely callous and negligent in prosecuting the matter. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v, B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, by referring various earlier decisions of Superior Courts, held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay: (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 suppose…

Mukhtar Ramzan Shaikh, Vapi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-6, Vapi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 628/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat12 Dec 2023AY 2010-11

Section 139Section 143(3)Section 148Section 69ASection 80C

Dhanesh Jyotindra Kothari, Mumbai Suburban vs. Income Tax Office(It)-3(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2952/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 2952 & 2951/Mum/2023 (A.Y: 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dhanesh Jyotindra Vs. Ito (It) – 3(1)(1), Kothari,A-Wing, Flat No. Air India Bldg, 6, Mahavir Krupa, Nariman Point, Vallabh Baug Lane, Mumbai-400021. Extn. Ghatkopar (E), Mumbai-4000077 Pan/Gir No. : Adapk9004H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri.Kirit.S.Sanghvi.Ar Respondent By : Shri. G.J.Ninawe. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 01.11.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 03.11.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Two Appeals Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 147 R.W.S 144C & U/Sec 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri.Kirit.S.Sanghvi.ARFor Respondent: Shri. G.J.Ninawe. Sr. DR

Section 147Section 148

…nd the contents of the application found that there is a reasonable cause explained and there is no benefit is derived in causing delay in filing appeal before the CIT(A). Whereas the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injus…

Mr Bimal H. Kiri, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax. Circle 19(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1335/MUM/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Sept 2023AY 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri Neelkanth Khandelwal &For Respondent: Ms. R.M Brindha.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ate Authority finds that the litigant has deliberately and intentionally delayed filing of the appeal, that he is careless, negligent and his conduct is lacking in bona fide. 8. Similarly the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, has held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 to remove injus…

Mahamadali Adam Patel, Bharuch vs. Income Tax Offocer, Ward 1(2), Bharuch

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 90/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.90/Srt/2023 (Ay 2017-18) (Hearing In Physical Court) Mahamadali Adam Patel Income Tax Officer, Apana Nagar Society, Ward-1(2), Bharuch-392001 Vs At P.O. Vagara, Bharuch-392001 Pan No: Adxpp 0699 Q अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Krutarth K Desai, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr Date Of Filing Appeal 03.02.2023 सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 17.03.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 17.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 27.11.2021 For Assessment Year 2017-18, Which In Turn Arises Out Assessment Order Passed By Income-Tax Officer-Ward-1(2)/ Assessing Officer Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 19.12.2019. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Appellant Was Hold The Status Of Agriculturist, During The Year Under Consideration I.E. Ay 2017-18. The Entire Money Received Was The Income From Agriculture Activities Which Are Wholly Exempt Mahamadali Adam Patel From Taxation Purview. Hence The Appellant Is Not Liable To Pay Any Tax On This Income Addition Made By The Authority & Hence This Appeal. 2. The Learned Assessing Officer Has Erred In Appreciating The Factual Matrix Of The Case & Therefore The Addition Deserves To Be Deleted.

Section 144Section 254(1)

…elay in filing assessees appeal. To support his submission, Ld.AR for the assessee relied upon the following decisions:  Rafiq C Munshilal (AIR 1981 SC 1400)  N.Balakrishnan Vs M. Krishnamurthy (1998) (7 SCC 123)  B. Madhuri Goud vs. B Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693  Emsons Organics Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT (2020) 113 taxmann.com 269 (ITAT-Chandigarh) 4. On the other hand, Ld. Senior Departmental-Representative (Ld. Sr-DR) for the Revenue strongly opposed the delay of condonation. The Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue submits that assessee is a habitual defaulter that assessee neither appeared before the Assessing Officer de…

Mittal Park Co-Op Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (A), Delhi

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

ITA 1029/MUM/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalmittal Park Co-Opp. Housing Society Ltd. 44, Mittal Park, Janardhan Mhatra Marg, Ruiapark, Juhu-Mumbai-400049. Pan: Aaaam2918E ...... Appellant Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), (National Faceless Appeal Centre), Delhi. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Manoj Mahimkar Respondent By : Sh. Dilip K. Shah, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 01/09/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29/11/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (For Short ‘Nfac’), Delhi Dated 06.04.2022 Under Section 254 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Honourable Commissioner Of Income Tax- (Appeal), Nfac, Delhi, [Hon. Cit- (A)] Has Erred On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In The Law Declining To Condone The Delay In Filing The Appeal.

For Appellant: Sh. Manoj MahimkarFor Respondent: Sh. Dilip K. Shah, Sr.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 249(2)Section 254Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…him. If the explanation does not smack of malafides or it is not put forth as part of a dilatory strategy the Court must show utmost consideration to the suitor. 12. We have noted that in the Hon'ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, by referring various earlier decisions of Superior Courts and held that the following principal must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay: (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 suppos…

St. Francis De Sales Church Trust, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT -9 (CPC), Banglore

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

ITA 1996/MUM/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh() & Shri Gagan Goyal ()

Section 11Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

…t him. If the explanation does not smack of malafides or it is not put forth as part of a dilatory strategy the Court must show utmost consideration to the suitor. 9. We have noted that in the Hon’ble Supreme Court in B. MadhuriGoudv. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, by referring various earlier decisions of Superior Courts and held that the following principal must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 suppo…

Shri Rakesh Garh, Kishangarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kishangarh

ITA 318/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2021AY 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT)

Section 271B

…the facts of each keeping in mind that in construing the expression 'sufficient cause', the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. Sh. Rakesh Garg Vs ITO (ix) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, by referring various to earlier decisions of Superior Courts and held the following principal must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; (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 suppos…

Shri Rakesh Garg, Kishangarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Kishangarh

ITA 317/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv)For Respondent: Smt. Rooni Paul (Addl.CIT)

Section 271B

Digite Inc. Usa, Pune vs. DCIT (International Taxation), New Delhi

Accordingly, ground of appeal No.4 is dismissed

ITA 382/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Sh. Kuldip Singh

Section 9Section 91

…se the discretion of the facts of each case keeping in mind that in construing the expression 'sufficient cause', the principle of advancing substantial justice is of prime importance. 9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy (2012) 12 SCC 693, by referring to various earlier decisions held that the following principles must be kept in mind while considering the application for condonation of delay; There should be a liberal, pragmatic, (i) justice oriented, non-pedantic approach while dealing with an application for condonation of delay, for the courts are not supposed to legalise inj…

Digite Inc., Usa, Pune vs. ADIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, ground of appeal No.4 is dismissed

ITA 772/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. R. K. Pandaand. Sh. Kuldip Singh

Section 9Section 91