Office of the Chief Post Master General v. Living Media India Ltd.

348 ITR 7Supreme Court of India2012#2324 most cited

What is Office of the Chief Post Master General v. Living Media India Ltd. authority for?

The law of limitation applies to all, including the government. Condonation of delay in filing appeals requires a party to demonstrate sufficient, bona fide, and reasonable cause, as courts should not condone delays mechanically or for routine explanations, gross negligence, or inaction.

50

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Office of the Chief Post Master General v. Living Media India Ltd. · 2012 SC · 348 ITR 7 · condonation of delay · law of limitation · Section 249 · Section 253 · sufficient cause · reasonable cause · strict application of limitation · government delay · gross negligence

Also reported as

20 Taxmann.com 347207 Taxmann 163

Sections most often in play

Section 147Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 142(1)Section 144BSection 270ASection 271AAC(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 3(1)section 249(3)legal representativesection 253(5)section 249(2)section 249delay in filing appealsection 246section 24section 246areasonable causecondonation of delay

Judgments citing Office of the Chief Post Master General v. Living Media India Ltd.

KRISHNA CHANDRA DAS,ALIPORE, TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS SOUTH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2989/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250Section 271A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH AT KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2987, 2988 & 2989/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2019-20 Krishna Chandra Das I.T.O., Ward-25(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AJAPD6700B Appearances: Assessee represented by : B.B. Payra, AR. Department represented by : Dipu Koley, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 30-March-2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 17-April-2026 ORDER PER BENCH: These three appeals filed by the assessee are against the common order of the Commissione…

KRISHNA CHANDRA DAS,ALIPORE, TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. I.T.O., WARD- 25(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2987/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250Section 271A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH AT KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2987, 2988 & 2989/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2019-20 Krishna Chandra Das I.T.O., Ward-25(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AJAPD6700B Appearances: Assessee represented by : B.B. Payra, AR. Department represented by : Dipu Koley, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 30-March-2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 17-April-2026 ORDER PER BENCH: These three appeals filed by the assessee are against the common order of the Commissione…

KRISHNA CHANDRA DAS,ALIPORE, TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS SOUTH vs. I.T.O., WARD - 25(1),, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2988/KOL/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Apr 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 250Section 271A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘B’ BENCH AT KOLKATA Before SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No(s). 2987, 2988 & 2989/KOL/2025 Assessment Year(s) 2019-20 Krishna Chandra Das I.T.O., Ward-25(1), Kolkata Vs. (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN: AJAPD6700B Appearances: Assessee represented by : B.B. Payra, AR. Department represented by : Dipu Koley, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR. Date of concluding the hearing : 30-March-2026 Date of pronouncing the order : 17-April-2026 ORDER PER BENCH: These three appeals filed by the assessee are against the common order of the Commissione…

KSHATRIYA VIKAS PARISAD GUJARAT,AHMEDABAD vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

Accordingly, in the absence of any satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay of 1109 days, the application filed by the assessee for condonation of delay is dismissed

ITA 2485/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2026

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Ms. Mauli Shah, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT DR

…fy the extraordinary delay of more than three years in approaching the Tribunal. 7. In this regard, reference may be made to the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. vs. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC) wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that inordinate delay cannot be condoned merely on the basis of routine explanations and that the party seeking condonation must show bona fide and reasonable cause for the delay. The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that courts cannot condone delay in a mechanical manner where the explanation furnished is…

MVR PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-16(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 1254/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Filed Petitions For Condonation Of Delay Along With Affidavits Explaining The Reasons Contending, Inter Alia, That The Appeal Could Not Be Filed Within The Period Of Limitation Due To Miscommunication & Misguidance With The Appointed Learned Counsel Regarding The Case Proceedings To The Assessee. Further, The Appellant, Relied Entirely On The Learned Counsel & The Company'S Internal Accounting Staff For Updates & Developments, Was Under The Bona Fide Impression That The Proceedings Were Being Diligently Pursued & Attended. In Addition To That, The Part Time Accountant, Mr. Pedditi Gopal Reddy Who Was Managing The Accounts Of The Appellant'S Company & Dealt With Appointed Counsel Unfortunately Fell Gravely Ill During The Covid-19 Pandemic Period & Passed Away Which Led To A Breakdown In The Flow Of Communication Between The Assessee & Their Legal Representative. The Assessee Only

For Appellant: Srinavya Adabala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR
Section 253(3)

…evidence or 17 ITA.No.1253/Hyd./2025 cogent material to demonstrate bonafides. It is well settled by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court yet in another decision in the case of O/o. Chief Post Master General & Ors. vs., Living Media India Ltd., & Anr. [2012] 348 ITR 7 (SC) that, Law of Limitation has to be applied with all its rigor and liberal approach cannot be extended to cases of gross negligence or inaction. 12. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that, the assessee has failed to explain delay and the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee i…

MVR PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-16(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed in limine

ITA 1253/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Filed Petitions For Condonation Of Delay Along With Affidavits Explaining The Reasons Contending, Inter Alia, That The Appeal Could Not Be Filed Within The Period Of Limitation Due To Miscommunication & Misguidance With The Appointed Learned Counsel Regarding The Case Proceedings To The Assessee. Further, The Appellant, Relied Entirely On The Learned Counsel & The Company'S Internal Accounting Staff For Updates & Developments, Was Under The Bona Fide Impression That The Proceedings Were Being Diligently Pursued & Attended. In Addition To That, The Part Time Accountant, Mr. Pedditi Gopal Reddy Who Was Managing The Accounts Of The Appellant'S Company & Dealt With Appointed Counsel Unfortunately Fell Gravely Ill During The Covid-19 Pandemic Period & Passed Away Which Led To A Breakdown In The Flow Of Communication Between The Assessee & Their Legal Representative. The Assessee Only

For Appellant: Srinavya Adabala, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Siva Prasad SV, Sr. AR
Section 253(3)

…evidence or 17 ITA.No.1253/Hyd./2025 cogent material to demonstrate bonafides. It is well settled by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court yet in another decision in the case of O/o. Chief Post Master General & Ors. vs., Living Media India Ltd., & Anr. [2012] 348 ITR 7 (SC) that, Law of Limitation has to be applied with all its rigor and liberal approach cannot be extended to cases of gross negligence or inaction. 12. In this view of the matter and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that, the assessee has failed to explain delay and the circumstances beyond the control of the assessee i…

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2079/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…ITA Nos 2050 and 2079 of 2025 Paranjyothi Thota आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री धिजय पाल राि, उपाध्‍यक्ष एिं श्री मंजुनाथ जी, लेखा सदस्‍य के समक्ष । Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. CIT Hyderabad Circle 5(1) PAN:AJQPT7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR सुिवधई की…

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2050/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

…ITA Nos 2050 and 2079 of 2025 Paranjyothi Thota आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, हैदराबाद पीठ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad श्री धिजय पाल राि, उपाध्‍यक्ष एिं श्री मंजुनाथ जी, लेखा सदस्‍य के समक्ष । Before Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-President A N D Shri Manjunatha G. Accountant Member आ.अपी.सं /ITA Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. CIT Hyderabad Circle 5(1) PAN:AJQPT7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee by: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue by: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR सुिवधई की…

TIRUMALA RAO BATTU,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 312/VIZ/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69

…d to condone inordinate delay where the explanation is vague, casual, or lacking in bona fides. My aforesaid view is supported by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC), wherein it was held as under: “It is not that a delay of a few days is to be condoned automatically. The law of limitation is founded on public policy. The courts have to exercise discretion only when sufficient cause is shown and not in a routine manner.” Similarly, in Basawaraj & Anr. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2013) 14 SCC 81, t…

AUDREY BERNICE ROY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 494/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 194JSection 44A

…d to condone inordinate delay where the explanation is vague, casual, or lacking in bona fides. My aforesaid view is supported by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC), wherein it was held as under: “It is not that a delay of a few days is to be condoned automatically. The law of limitation is founded on public policy. The courts have to exercise discretion only when sufficient cause is shown and not in a routine manner.” Similarly, in Basawaraj & Anr. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2013) 14 SCC 81, t…

KUNKULAGUNTA MALLIKARJUNA RAO,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

Accordingly, finding no infirmity in the view of the CIT(A), who, in my view, in the absence of any plausible explanation of the assessee regarding the delay involved in filing of the appeal, had r...

ITA 579/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 68Section 69

…ikarjuna Rao inordinate delay where the explanation is vague, casual, or lacking in bona fides. My aforesaid view is supported by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC), wherein it was held as under: “It is not that a delay of a few days is to be condoned automatically. The law of limitation is founded on public policy. The courts have to exercise discretion only when sufficient cause is shown and not in a routine manner.” Similarly, in Basawaraj & Anr. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2013) 14 SCC 81, t…

BODA RAMASATYANARAYANA,DRAKSHARAMAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAKINADA

ITA 532/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 131Section 133(6)Section 142(1)(i)Section 144Section 69A

…d to condone inordinate delay where the explanation is vague, casual, or lacking in bona fides. My aforesaid view is supported by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Office of the Chief Post Master General & Ors. v. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC), wherein it was held as under: “It is not that a delay of a few days is to be condoned automatically. The law of limitation is founded on public policy. The courts have to exercise discretion only when sufficient cause is shown and not in a routine manner.” Similarly, in Basawaraj & Anr. v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2013) 14 SCC 81, t…

BABUGARI KAREEM BASHA,KURNOOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NANDYAL

In the result, appeals of the Assessee are dismissed mutatis mutandis for both the A

ITA 1449/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 249(3)Section 69A

…ned to condone the delay in the filing of such applications.” 9. Further, it is well settled law by the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court yet in another decision in the case of O/o. Chief Post Master General & Ors. vs., Living Media India Ltd., & Anr. [2012] 348 ITR 7 (SC) that, Law of Limitation has to be applied with all its rigor and liberal approach cannot be extended to cases of gross negligence or inaction. 10. Further, u/sec.253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, such powers can be exercised only upon showing of ‘sufficient cause’ preventing the assessee from filing the appeal within the prescribed period. I…

SHARDA DEVI,BASTI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,, BASTI

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

ITA 525/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow13 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2017-18 Sharda Devi, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, W/O Shyam Singh, Near Zila Basti-New Chikitsalaya, Purani Basti, Basti-2721 Pan: Auspd8424B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. Amit Kumar, Dr Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.01.2026 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Dated 16.01.2025 Wherein The Ld. Cit(A) Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Order Of Penalty Passed By The Ld. Ao Dated 17.01.2022 In Limine Without Going Into The Merits Of The Case. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. Because The Cit(A) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Upholding The Addition Of Rs.8,11,663/- Being Cash Deposited In Bank During Demonetization Period Under Section 69A R.W.S. 115Bbe Of The Act, Which Addition Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law Be Deleted. 02. Because The Cit(A) Has Failed To Appreciate That The Assessee Is Carrying On The Business Of Household Items, Such As, Business Of Achar, Kuchry (Grocery) Declaring Profit Under Section 44Ad @ 8% Wherein The Provisions Of Section 68 & Section 69 Are Not Applicable, The Addition Of Rs.8,11,663/- Made By The Ao & Upheld By The Cit(A) Is Contrary To The Provisions Of Law Be Deleted. 03. Because The Explanation Furnished By The Assessee Has Not Been Found False Of Untrue, The Addition Of Rs.8,11,663/- Made By The Ao & Upheld By The Cit(A) Be Deleted.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Amit Kumar, DR
Section 115BSection 147Section 271ASection 44ASection 68Section 69Section 69A

…nt cause was a condition precedent for the exercise of discretional jurisdiction vested in the Court. He also placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chief Post Master General and Ors vs. Living Media India Limited (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC) wherein it had been held that where the conduct of the assessee shows the neglect of its own right for a long time in preferring appeals then judicial authorities were not required to enquire into belated and stale claims on the grounds of equity. The ld. CIT(A) quoted from the decision of the ITAT Delhi in the case of SRF Limited (Order dated…

VASAVI CLUB,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 994/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 115TSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(3)

…ew, the reasons given by the assessee for delay in filing of the appeal cannot be condoned. 12. It is well settled law by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of O/o. Chief Post Master General & Ors. vs. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. [2012] 348 ITR 7 (SC) that the law of limitation has to be applied with all its rigour and liberal approach cannot be extended to cases of gross negligence or inaction. In this view of the matter, and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that, the assessee has failed to explain the delay and the circumstances beyond its control for not filin…

MALIREDDI SRINATH,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), HDYERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1721/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 69A

…ew, the reasons given by the assessee for delay in filing of the appeal cannot be condoned. 11. It is well settled law by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of O/o. Chief Post Master General & Ors. vs. Living Media India Ltd. & Anr. [2012] 348 ITR 7 (SC) that the law of limitation has to be applied with all its rigour and liberal approach cannot be extended to cases of gross negligence or inaction. In this view of the matter, and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that, the assessee has failed to explain the delay and the circumstances beyond its control for not filin…

SRI TIRUMALA ESTATES AND FARMLANDS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 552/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Visakhapatnam Bench श्री मंजूनाथ जी, माननीय लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री रवीश सूद, माननीय न्याययक सदस्य SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.551 and 552/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Tirumala Estates and Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Farmlands, of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Central Circle – 1, Visakhapatnam. PAN : ACMFS9721J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ : Shri GVN Hari, Advocate Assessee (HYBRID) Repre…

SRI TIRUMALA ESTATES AND FARMLANDS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 551/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 40

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, विशाखापटणम पीठ में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Visakhapatnam Bench श्री मंजूनाथ जी, माननीय लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री रवीश सूद, माननीय न्याययक सदस्य SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.551 and 552/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2017-18) Shri Tirumala Estates and Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Farmlands, of Income Tax, Visakhapatnam. Central Circle – 1, Visakhapatnam. PAN : ACMFS9721J (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ : Shri GVN Hari, Advocate Assessee (HYBRID) Repre…

PURE HOME & LIVING PRIVATE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DLF BRANDS PRIVATE LIMITED),NEW DELHI vs. ASSISSTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2349/DEL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri M Balaganeshआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2349/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Pure Home & Living Private Acit, Limited, Vs. Circle 7(1), (Formerly Known As Dlf Brands C.R. Building, Ito, Private Limited), New Delhi. 204, Ground F/F, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Pan No.Aafca7971E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250

…ITA No. 2349/DEL/2025 PURE HOME & LIVING PRIVATE LIMITED IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI M BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.2349/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम PURE HOME & LIVING PRIVATE ACIT, LIMITED, Vs. Circle 7(1), (Formerly known as DLF Brands C.R. Building, ITO, Private Limited), New Delhi. 204, Ground F/F, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PHASE-III, New Delhi. PAN No.AAFCA7971E अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by Shri Satyajit Goyal, CA & Shri Rajat Garg, CA Revenue by Shri Ajay…

JIYAUDDIN KHAN,MAHARAJGANJ, UTTAR PRADESH vs. ITO 1(4), MAHARAJGANJ, MAHARAJGANJ, UTTAR PRADESH

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

ITA 139/ALLD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Allahabad30 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: 2015-16 Jiyauddin Khan V. Ito-1(4) Bhitauli Bazar, Maharjganj, Aayakar Bhawan, Maharajganj-273302. Maharajganj, Maharajganj-273301. Pan:Bafpk3621P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 24 09 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 09 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A. K. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 249(2)Section 69A

…he litigant, who is expected to be reasonable and prudent, under the particular circumstances.’ 2.8 The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Chief Postmaster General and Others vs. Living Media India Ltd. 5 ITA No. 3555/Del/2009 AY 2002- 03 and another (2012) 348 ITR 7 (SC) and in the case of Pundlik Jalam Patil (dead) by LRS vs. Executive Engineer, Jalgaon Medium Project (2008) 17 SCC 448 had held that when the conduct of the assessee and facts of the case clearly show the neglect of its own right in preferring appeals, then it is not expected from the judicial and quasi-judicial authorities to inquire into bela…

Showing 1–20 of 50 · Page 1 of 3