Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy v. ACIT

112 Taxmann.com 134Supreme Court of India2019#1703 most cited

What is Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy v. ACIT authority for?

Condonation of delay in filing an appeal is determined by the sufficiency of the cause shown, not merely the length of the delay, as the length of delay can never be the sole deciding factor.

66

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2020 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy v ACIT · 112 Taxmann.com 134 · condonation of delay · sufficient cause · appeal filing delay · Section 253(1) · Section 249(2) · Section 246A · length of delay · income tax appeals

Sections most often in play

Section 250Section 253(1)Section 144Section 246ASection 132Section 131Section 139(4)Section 139(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 253(1)section 249(2)section 253(3)section 139(4)section 246asection 249section 156delay in filing appealsection 253section 24first appealcondonation of delay

Judgments citing Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy v. ACIT

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,PANAJI, GOA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 281/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

…ld premise jointly & severally forms a sufficient- cause for delay condonation the Ld. AR placed reliance on catena of judicial precedent specifically ‘M/s Bhagwati Colonizer Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO’ [ITA No 169/Asr/2015], ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)],‘Basawaraj & Anr Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer’ [AIR 2014 SC 746]. 10. Au contraire, Ld. DR submitted that, at the threshold these appeals are filed with inordinate delay of 902 days. May it be so; however, the length of delay can never be sole factor in deciding as to whether it is condonable or not, but the explicit cause &…

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,PANAJI, GOA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 280/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

…ld premise jointly & severally forms a sufficient- cause for delay condonation the Ld. AR placed reliance on catena of judicial precedent specifically ‘M/s Bhagwati Colonizer Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO’ [ITA No 169/Asr/2015], ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)],‘Basawaraj & Anr Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer’ [AIR 2014 SC 746]. 10. Au contraire, Ld. DR submitted that, at the threshold these appeals are filed with inordinate delay of 902 days. May it be so; however, the length of delay can never be sole factor in deciding as to whether it is condonable or not, but the explicit cause &…

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,GOA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 279/PAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

…ld premise jointly & severally forms a sufficient- cause for delay condonation the Ld. AR placed reliance on catena of judicial precedent specifically ‘M/s Bhagwati Colonizer Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO’ [ITA No 169/Asr/2015], ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)],‘Basawaraj & Anr Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer’ [AIR 2014 SC 746]. 10. Au contraire, Ld. DR submitted that, at the threshold these appeals are filed with inordinate delay of 902 days. May it be so; however, the length of delay can never be sole factor in deciding as to whether it is condonable or not, but the explicit cause &…

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,GOA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 278/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

…ld premise jointly & severally forms a sufficient- cause for delay condonation the Ld. AR placed reliance on catena of judicial precedent specifically ‘M/s Bhagwati Colonizer Pvt. Ltd Vs ITO’ [ITA No 169/Asr/2015], ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)],‘Basawaraj & Anr Vs Special Land Acquisition Officer’ [AIR 2014 SC 746]. 10. Au contraire, Ld. DR submitted that, at the threshold these appeals are filed with inordinate delay of 902 days. May it be so; however, the length of delay can never be sole factor in deciding as to whether it is condonable or not, but the explicit cause &…

SHRI LEO DINIZ,BORDA, FATORDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD, PANAJI

The appeal is DISMISSED

ITA 150/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2016-17 Leo Deniz Row House No. 6 J P Andrade Residency, Borda Fatorda, Goa-403602 Pan: Amgpd8687A . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Omkar Godbole [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 02/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] By The Assessee Challenging Order Dt.

For Appellant: Mr Omkar Godbole [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 253(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI BENCH, GOA BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G. D. PADMAHSHALI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Years: 2016-17 Leo Deniz Row House No. 6 J P Andrade Residency, Borda Fatorda, Goa-403602 PAN: AMGPD8687A . . . . . . . Appellant V/s Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee by: Mr Omkar Godbole [‘Ld. AR’] Revenue by: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. DR’] Date of conclusive Hearing : 02/02/2026 Date of Pronouncement : 13/02/2026 ORDER PER G. D. PADMAHSHALI; This appeal is filed u/s 253(1) of…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 268/PAN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 267/PAN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 266/PAN/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 265/PAN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, KARWAR

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 264/PAN/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 263/PAN/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 262/PAN/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 261/PAN/2025[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 260/PAN/2025[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

SMT NEHA PRASANNA GHOTAGE,BELAGAVI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, 2, BELAGAVI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 259/PAN/2025[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji11 Feb 2026AY 2006-07

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 144Section 246ASection 249Section 250Section 253(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…tion of process of law after the lapse of almost a decade. Therefore, in limine the prayer for remand of the appellant is to be rejected in view of ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416] & ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 22 Neha Prasanna Ghotage Vs ACIT, Belgaum ITA No. 259 to 268/PAN/2025 AY: 2006-07 to 2010-11 15. Alternatively, the Revenue also submits that, having filed first appeal with more than inordinate delay, the assessee was granted multiple opportunities by Ld. CIT(A) to lay evidence in support of prayer of cond…

KAMAL KISHORE,SUJANGARH vs. ITO WARD-3 CHURU, CHURU

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 538/JODH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Kamal Kishore, ITO, Ward-3, Harijan Samday Bhawan Ke Churu. Piche, Ward No.30, Bhojlai Bass, Sujangarh, Churu – 331507. PAN No. CVUPK7918N Assessee by Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate (Virtually) Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT-DR (Physically) Revenue by Date of Hearing 08.01.2026. Date of Pronouncement 28.01.2026. ORDER DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, A.M.: The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[hereinaft…

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 171/PAN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

…knowledge of the appellant until tax recovery proceedings were initiated, the appellant placed strong reliance respectively on ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416 (Panaji-Tribunal)] and ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. 8. Au contraire, the Ld. DR Uniyal strongly objected the condonation petition & prayer of the appellant. It was refuted that, the basic facts of the case under consideration are ostensibly mis-stated & incorrectly ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 30 Union Bank Of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Vs DCIT ITA No. 169 to 171/PAN/2025 repres…

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 170/PAN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

…knowledge of the appellant until tax recovery proceedings were initiated, the appellant placed strong reliance respectively on ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416 (Panaji-Tribunal)] and ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. 8. Au contraire, the Ld. DR Uniyal strongly objected the condonation petition & prayer of the appellant. It was refuted that, the basic facts of the case under consideration are ostensibly mis-stated & incorrectly ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 30 Union Bank Of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Vs DCIT ITA No. 169 to 171/PAN/2025 repres…

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 169/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

…knowledge of the appellant until tax recovery proceedings were initiated, the appellant placed strong reliance respectively on ‘Meda Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy Vs ACIT’ [160 taxmann.com 416 (Panaji-Tribunal)] and ‘Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs ACIT’ [2019, 112 Taxmann.com 134 (SC)]. 8. Au contraire, the Ld. DR Uniyal strongly objected the condonation petition & prayer of the appellant. It was refuted that, the basic facts of the case under consideration are ostensibly mis-stated & incorrectly ITAT-Panaji Page 10 of 30 Union Bank Of India (Erstwhile Corporation Bank) Vs DCIT ITA No. 169 to 171/PAN/2025 repres…

M/S B.N. DUTTA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. DCIT, CIR. 2, DURGAPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 705/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.705/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S B. N. Dutta ….…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant Head Office: 518, G Road, Sonari West Layout, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 831011. [Pan: Aadfb0648J] Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Durgapur……..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. Khasnobis, Ca & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri H. Robindro Singh, Addl. Cit - Dr & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2025 & December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 13.02.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Indore [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Partnership Firm & Engaged In The Business Of Civil Construction & Maintenance Of Civil Structures Inside Stell Plants. For The Assessment Year 2011-12, The Assessee Filed Its Return On 30.09.2011 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.36,58,080/- & Total Tax & Cess Liability Of Rs.11,30,347/- Was Discharged In Full Resulting In A Refund Of Rs.12,520/-. The Return Of The Assessee Was Processed By The Cpc U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 27.01.2012. The Assessee Did Not Receive Any Information From The Cpc Either Directly By Way Of Service Of Physical Copy Of The Same Or From The Then Authorised Representative Namely Mr. S. N. Gupta. Due To Non-Receipt Of

Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH KOLKATA Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member and Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Judicial Member I.T.A. No.705/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s B. N. Dutta ….…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant Head Office: 518, G Road, Sonari West Layout, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 831011. [PAN: AADFB0648J] vs. DCIT, Circle-2, Durgapur……..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances by: Shri D. Khasnobis, CA, & None appeared on behalf of the appellant. Shri H. Robindro Singh, Addl. CIT - DR, & None appeared on behalf of the Re…

Showing 1–20 of 66 · Page 1 of 4

Raja Kishor Raghuramy Reddy v. ACIT (112 Taxmann.com 134) — Cited in 66 Judgments | BharatTax