← All Phrases

“condonation of delay”

AppealsSection 249Section 24912,312 judgments

The decision most relied on for condonation of delay is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on condonation of delay

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.
2 SCC 107 · 1987 · Supreme Court
451
citing judgments

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy
7 SCC 123 · 1998 · Supreme Court
368
citing judgments

The Supreme Court outlines the principles for condoning delay in filing appeals, stating that a litigant's lapse is not always a bar if the explanation is bona fide and not a dilatory strategy. Courts should show utmost consideration to suitors and prioritize substantial justice unless the delay is deliberately to gain time.

Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr
398 ITR 250 · 2017 · High Court
291
citing judgments

This case is cited as an authority supporting the condonation of delay in filing income tax appeals, particularly when an assessee presents a request for such condonation.

Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others
118 ITR 507 · 1979 · Supreme Court
268
citing judgments

For condoning delay, the term 'sufficient cause' must be interpreted liberally and purposively to advance justice. Delay not tainted by mala fides, gross negligence, or recklessness, and based on honestly obtained legal advice, constitutes sufficient cause.

Inder Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
2025 INSC 382 · 2025 · Supreme Court
267
citing judgments

Non-deliberate procedural delays caused by circumstances beyond control must be condoned in the interest of substantial justice, even if the delay is significant, such as over 1500 days.

Vedabhai v. Santaram
253 ITR 798 · 2002 · Supreme Court
262
citing judgments

When substantial justice and technical considerations are in conflict, substantial justice should be prioritized. Condoning delay requires a cautious approach without malafide or dilatory tactics, and 'sufficient cause' should be interpreted liberally to advance substantial justice.

Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT
280 ITR 357 · 2006 · High Court
182
citing judgments

The expression "sufficient cause" for condoning delay in filing appeals must receive a liberal and purposive construction. This approach aims to advance substantial justice, which is of paramount importance.

Judgments citing condonation of delay

Sahkari Ganna Vikas Samiti Ltd Vikramjot Basti, Vikramjot vs. Inocme Tax Officer Basti -New, Income Tax Office Basti

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 486/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sahkari Ganna Vikas V. The Income Tax Officer Samiti Ltd. Basti Vikramjot, Basti (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aabas4611B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.12.2024, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under The Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912. The Main Activity Of The Assessee Was Marketing Of Sugar Cane Grown By The Cane Growers, Who Were Members Of The Assessee-Society. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 21.03.2018, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,73,170/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee-Society Had Received Commission From Sugar Mills On Supply Of Sugar Cane Of Rs.70,16,032/-, Which Was Claimed As Exempt In Terms Of Section 80P(2)(A)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

there is a delay of 144 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application dated 22.07.2025 for condonation of delay, stating therein that the impugned order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority was served on the email id of the assessee’s Counsel ... delay being condoned. 5.0 In view of the prayer made by the Assessee and no objection by the Ld. Sr. D.R., I condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 6.0 None was present for the assessee when the appeal was called

Devika Singh, Lucknow vs. Income Tax Officer-1(1), Lucknow

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

ITA 479/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Devika Singh V. The Income Tax Officer 1(1) B-1529, Indira Nagar Lucknow - New Lucknow (U.P) Tan/Pan:Cmips8743J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sandeep Kumar, Fca Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Kumar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 271ASection 44ASection 68

days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. He further submitted that the assessee had filed an application dated 14.07.2025 for condonation of delay, duly supported by an Affidavit, stating therein that the appeal before the Ld. First Appellate Authority was fixed for hearing on 29.01.2021 on which date ... delay being condoned. 4.0 In view of the prayer made by the Ld. A.R. and no objection by the Ld. Sr. D.R., I condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 5.0 During the course of hearing before me, the Ld. A.R. submitted that

Virat Construction, Shahjahanpur vs. ITO-1(4) Shahjahanpur-1, Shahjahanpur

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

ITA 477/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2018-19 Virat Construction V. The Ito-I(4) Tarin Bahadurganj Shahjahanpur-1 Shahjahanpur (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aapfv3897H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 270A

days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. It was brought to my notice that the assessee has not filed any application for condonation of delay. However, since the Ld. Sr. D.R. had no objection to the delay being condoned, I condone the delay in filing of the appeal

Rajendra Kumar Jaiswal, Barabanki vs. Income Tax Officer, Barabanki

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

ITA 476/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Rajendra Kumar Jaiswal V. The Income Tax Officer – 5(5) Sumerganj Dharauli Ram Barabanki - 2 Sanehi Ghat Barabanki (U.P) Tan/Pan:Ajnpj8871G (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application dated 15.07.2023, which was received by the Registry of this Office on 11.07.2025, for condonation of delay, stating therein that the assessee being a resident of rural area had limited access and technical knowledge of online transactions and, therefore, the assessee ... delay being condoned. 9. In view of the prayer made by the Assessee and no objection by the Ld. Sr. D.R., I condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 10. Since the order passed by the AO was under section

Om Prakash Singh, Lucknow vs. The Income Tax Officer -1(4), Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 777/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatom Prakash Singh V. The Income Tax Officer- J-166 Opp City School 1(4), Lucknow Raibareily Road, South City Pratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Lucknow-226001. Lucknow-226001. Pan:Aidps7478M (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 27 10 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 27 10 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

pertaining to the assessment year 2021-22. 2. The present appeal is barred by 63 days. The assessee has filed application seeking condonation of delay in filing of this appeal. The application for condonation of delay is supported by an affidavit of the assessee. The Ld. Sr. Departmental Representative ... Revenue did not express any objection to the delay being condoned. Therefore, I condone the delay in filing of this appeal and the appeal is admitted for hearing on merits. 3. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the dispute has been settled under the Direct

Shri Rambag Mandir Tatha Ramchandraji Bhagwan Sansthan, Pandharpur vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Pune

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

ITA 658/PUN/2025[Not Applicable]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Dhiraj DandgavalFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

delay of 22 days in filing of this appeal. An affidavit in this regard has been filed by the assessee for condonation of delay mentioning the reasons which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal in time. The reasons mainly include that the Secretary of the assessee-trust ... case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382), we condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

Prem Bhakti Sadhana Kendra, Nashik vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1923/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iii)

that there is delay of 223 days and 164 days in presenting the instant appeals before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed Applications for condonation of delay explaining the reasons which led to delay. 3. After hearing both the sides and perusing the averments made in the condonation applications ... case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). condone the delay in filing the appeals before this Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.1922/PUN/2025 : 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a trust, filed application

Prem Bhakti Sadhana Kendra, Nashik vs. CIT(Exemption), Pune

In the result, both the appeals filed by the appellant trust are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1922/PUN/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Amit Bobde
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iii)

that there is delay of 223 days and 164 days in presenting the instant appeals before this Tribunal. Assessee has filed Applications for condonation of delay explaining the reasons which led to delay. 3. After hearing both the sides and perusing the averments made in the condonation applications ... case of Inder Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh judgment dated 21.03.2025 (2025 INSC 382). condone the delay in filing the appeals before this Tribunal and admit the appeals for adjudication. ITA No.1922/PUN/2025 : 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a trust, filed application

Shaila Omprakash Jethale, Pune vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1365/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1364 & 1365/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 133(6)Section 138Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 13. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The delay which was quantified for quantum appeal was 880 days, however, after considering the Covid circumstances, as per the directions ... banks and creditors, losses incurred by the family there is a case beyond doubt that there is a sufficient cause for condonation of delay within the meaning of section 249(3) for CIT(A) to condone the delay. 17. The series of decisions from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, High

Shaila Omprakash Jethale, Pune vs. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1364/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Ms. Astha Chandraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1364 & 1365/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra AgiwalFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 133(6)Section 138Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). 13. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the sufficient cause for condonation of delay. The delay which was quantified for quantum appeal was 880 days, however, after considering the Covid circumstances, as per the directions ... banks and creditors, losses incurred by the family there is a case beyond doubt that there is a sufficient cause for condonation of delay within the meaning of section 249(3) for CIT(A) to condone the delay. 17. The series of decisions from the Hon'ble Supreme Court, High

Prasada Rao Ganipineni, Nellore vs. ACIT., Circle - 1, Nellore

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

ITA 640/HYD/2025[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad27 Oct 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha Gआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.640/Hyd./2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year 2010-2011 Mr. Prasada Rao Ganipineni, Nellore. The Acit, Circle-1, Pin – 524 004. Vs. Nellore. Pan Acvpg9050D Andhra Pradesh (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca, A. Srinivas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 27.10.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27.10.2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao: This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 13.12.2024 Of The Learned Cit(A), Hyderabad- 11, Hyderabad, For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2

For Appellant: CA, A. SrinivasFor Respondent: : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

outset, there is a delay of 10 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the assessee. The learned AR of the assessee has submitted that after receiving the impugned order of the learned ... pointed- out by the Registry may be condoned. 3. On the other hand, the Learned DR has not seriously objected to the condonation of delay of 10 days as explained by the assessee in the affidavit. 3 ITA.No.640/Hyd./2025 4. Having considered the rival submissions and careful perusal

Mitra Instritution Bhowanipur Branch, Kolkata vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata

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

ITA 742/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

Registry has informed that the appeal is delayed by 159 days. Along with the appeal memo, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of delay. The reasons mentioned are that against the order dated 27/08/2024 of the Ld. CIT(E), the assessee was required to file the appeal ... Exemption) was not the correct approach and the society was advised to file an appeal before the Tribunal with an application for condonation of delay. It is stated that the delay is neither intentional nor wilful but occurred due to good and sufficient reasons as mentioned and it is requested

The Salesian Sisters, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 1(3), Exempt, Kolkata

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

ITA 576/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 11(3)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 264

grounds of appeal: “1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing appeal before him in spite of the reasonable cause shown. I.T.A. No.: 576/KOL/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 The Salesian Siste ... assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who perused the written submission filed by the assessee and also the petition for condonation of delay but did not condone the delay of 469 days in filing the appeal and dismissed the appeal of the assessee by relying upon

D L Agarwala Charitable Trust, North Twenty Four Parganas vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 556/KOL/2025[---]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.555&556/Kol/2025 D L. Agarwala Charitable Trust……………..……….……….……….……Appellant 336, Canal Street, Sreebhumi S O Lake Town, North 24 Parganas, W.B- 700048.. [Pan: Aabtd5563G] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Raju Mukherjee, Fcs & N. D Mimani, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Both Dated 23.03.2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Rejecting The Separate Applications Filed In Form 10Ab For Final Approval As Per The Provisions Of Sections 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arise From The Final Registration U/S 12A Of The Act Which Is Compulsory For Getting Subsequent Registration U/S 80G Of The Act Which Are Interconnected In Both The Appeals & Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee With Delays Of 21 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of The Delays.

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

affidavits for condonation of the delays. ITA Nos.555&556/Kol/2025 D L. Agarwala Charitable Trust After considering the reasons cited in the affidavits for condonation of delay, we find that the reasons are valid and consequently, the delays in filing both the appeals are hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose

D L Agarwala Charitable Trust, North Twenty Four Parganas vs. CIT (Exemption), Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 555/KOL/2025[---]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.555&556/Kol/2025 D L. Agarwala Charitable Trust……………..……….……….……….……Appellant 336, Canal Street, Sreebhumi S O Lake Town, North 24 Parganas, W.B- 700048.. [Pan: Aabtd5563G] Vs. Cit (Exemption), Kolkata………………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Raju Mukherjee, Fcs & N. D Mimani, Fca Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Raja Sengupta, Cit- Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Present Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Assessee Against Separate Orders Both Dated 23.03.2012 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemption), Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(E)’] Rejecting The Separate Applications Filed In Form 10Ab For Final Approval As Per The Provisions Of Sections 12A(1)(Ac)(Iii) & 80G(5)(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since Both The Appeals Relate To The Same Assessee & Arise From The Final Registration U/S 12A Of The Act Which Is Compulsory For Getting Subsequent Registration U/S 80G Of The Act Which Are Interconnected In Both The Appeals & Therefore, These Appeals Were Heard Together & We Are Going To Dispose Of These Appeals By Passing A Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee With Delays Of 21 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Affidavits For Condonation Of The Delays.

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

affidavits for condonation of the delays. ITA Nos.555&556/Kol/2025 D L. Agarwala Charitable Trust After considering the reasons cited in the affidavits for condonation of delay, we find that the reasons are valid and consequently, the delays in filing both the appeals are hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose

DCIT, Central Circle-4(3), Kolkata vs. Decorum Infrastructure Private Limited, Howrah

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1762/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR (Accountant Member), SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Miraz D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Manas Mondal, Sr. DR
Section 132(1)Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 68

assessment year 2022-2023. 2. The appeal of the revenue has been filed belatedly by 04 days for which condonation petition seeking the condonation of delay in filing the appeal by the revenue. Looking to the facts of the case, we condone the delay of 04 days in filing

Anupama Vintrade Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1313/KOL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyassessment Year: 2015-16 Anupama Vintrade Pvt. Ltd..….……………………….……….……….……Appellant 77, 4Th Floor, Room 422, Elliot Road, Kol-700016.. [Pan: Aahca5675R] Vs. Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata….……………………………….....……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Manas Mondal, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 16, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.03.2025 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 14 Days. 2. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149(1)(b)Section 250

days. 2. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of the delay. After considering the reasons cited in the affidavit for condonation of delay, we find that the reasons are valid and consequently, the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and we proceed to dispose

Shyam Greenfield Developer Private Limited, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1164/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

Limited. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 90 days. An application seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under: “This is with reference to the appellate order bearing date 19.12.2024 passed ... submit that the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional and therefore it is a fit case where the Hon'ble Tribunal should condone the delay for rendering substantive justice. In this regard, reference is drawn to the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Improvement Trust

Shree Capital Services Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1152/KOL/2025[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 253(3)

Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred by limitation by 28 days. A petition seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under: “1.0 This is with reference to the appeal of Shree Capital Services Limited (hereinafter referred ... appeal may please be condoned and the appeal be admitted on merits, in the interest of substantial justice.” 1.2. Considering the petition for condonation of delay and the reasons stated therein, we are satisfied that the assessee had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant

ITO, Ward 10(2), Kolkata vs. Alex Tradecom Private Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2198/KOL/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubeyita Nos.2197 & 2198/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 Ito, Ward-10(2), Kolkata…………..…………………………….…….……Appellant Vs. Alex Tradecom Pvt. Ltd…………..……………….………...……...…..…..Respondent 4, Ratan Sarkar Garden Street, Burrabazar, Kol- 700069. [Pan: Aajca6146P] Appearances By: Smt. Madhumita Das, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Akshay Ringasia, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : October 15, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : October 27, 2025 Order Per Pradip Kumar Choubey: Both The Captioned Appeals Have Been Preferred By The Revenue For The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15 Against Separate Orders Dated 05.08.2024 & 26.07.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’) Respectively. Since, The Issues Involved In Both The Appeals Are Common & Relate To The Same Assessee, Therefore, These Appeals Have Been Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By This Consolidated Order. 2. Both The Appeals Have Been Filed By The Revenue With Delays Of 38 Days. The Revenue Has Filed Separate Affidavits For Condonation Of The Delays. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavits For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid And

Section 148Section 148ASection 250

days. The revenue has filed separate affidavits for condonation of the delays. After considering the reasons cited in the affidavits for condonation of delay, we find that the reasons are valid and ITA Nos.2197 & 2198/Kol/2024 Alex Tradecom Pvt. Ltd consequently, the delays in filing both the appeals are hereby condoned