← 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

A Ayeepalayam Primary Agro Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Namakkal

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1529/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1528, 1529, 1530 & 1531/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 A Ayeepalayam Primary Agri Co-Op Income Tax Officer, Credit Society Limited, V. Ward -1, A.Ayeepalayam Athanur Post, Namakkal. Rasipuram Tk, Namakkal – 636 301. [Pan: Aaaas-6232-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri. T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 270ASection 80P

assessee held that the assessee has failed to establish sufficient cause for delay in filing of appeals and rejected the petition for condonation of delay and dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without adjudicating on merits. 5. The ld.AR stated that, the ld.CIT(A) appeals erred in dismissing ... appeal without condoning the delay in all the four appeals, inspite of ‘reasonable cause’ shown for delay in filing. The ld.AR stated that the assessee has not given any opportunity to submit written submissions and for hearing the appeals and thus, the orders of the ld.CIT

A Ayeepalayam Primary Agro Co-Op Credit Society Ltd., Namakkal vs. ITO, Ward-1, Namakkal

In the result, all four appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1528/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai26 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 1528, 1529, 1530 & 1531/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2020-21 A Ayeepalayam Primary Agri Co-Op Income Tax Officer, Credit Society Limited, V. Ward -1, A.Ayeepalayam Athanur Post, Namakkal. Rasipuram Tk, Namakkal – 636 301. [Pan: Aaaas-6232-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 22.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 26.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri. T.S. Lakshmi Venkatraman, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. Aroon Prasad, Addl. CIT
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 270ASection 80P

assessee held that the assessee has failed to establish sufficient cause for delay in filing of appeals and rejected the petition for condonation of delay and dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee without adjudicating on merits. 5. The ld.AR stated that, the ld.CIT(A) appeals erred in dismissing ... appeal without condoning the delay in all the four appeals, inspite of ‘reasonable cause’ shown for delay in filing. The ld.AR stated that the assessee has not given any opportunity to submit written submissions and for hearing the appeals and thus, the orders of the ld.CIT

The National Sodality Centre, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward-2(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2733/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt Renu Jauhrithe National Sodality Vs. Ito – Ward 2(4) 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Centre, Bldg, Pedder Road, 1, Seva Niketan Sir, Jj Mumbai. Road, Byculla, Mumbai. Pan/Gir No. Aaatt0571B (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Smt. Vasanti Patel A/W Shri M.A Gohel Respondent By Ms.Jancy Elizabeth Rani. Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 25.07.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 26.07.2024 Order Per Renu Jauhri, Am: “ The Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Lucknow (In Short “Addl. Cit(A)”) Passed U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”). The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: The Appellant Prays That The Additions Made To The Income May Kindly Be Deleted As The Same Is Unwarranted, Unjustified & 2 The National Sodality Centre , Mumbai Contrary To The Principles Of Natural Justice & The Benefits Of Section 11 Be Restored. The Appellant Hereby Craves The Leave To Add To, Alter Or Amplify The Aforesaid Grounds Of Appeal, Which Are Independent Of Each Other, As & When The Need Arises At The Time Of Hearing. I, Fr. George Rosario, The Trustee Of The National Sodality Centre, The Appellant Hereby Declare That What Is Stated Hereinabove Is True To The Best Of My Information & Belief.

Section 11Section 143(1)

Lucknow dismissed the appeal on the ground that the AO as well as Appellate authorities do not have the power to grant condonation of delay in filing Form No. 10B. 3. Before us, the Ld. AR submitted that the audit report in Form No. 10B had been filed

Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kurnool vs. Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Projects Pvt Ltd, Kurnool

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 1763/HYD/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. Flat No.40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Of Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Income Tax, Circle – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. 40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Cross Applicant) (Respondent/Assessee) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.AR
Section 10BSection 154Section 250

facts and in law. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in admitting the appeal of the assessee after condoning delay of 1159 days. Condonation of delay is not warranted when assessee takes a conscious decision not to file appeal against the assessment order as held in the case of S.S Builders ... only a tax-neutral. The Ld.CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taken note of various facts, condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the appeal for adjudication. The Ld.CIT(A) has also deleted the addition made by the AO towards the disallowance

Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Projects Pvt Ltd., Kurnool vs. ITO, Ward-1, Kurnool

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is allowed

ITA 615/HYD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2010-11 Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. Flat No.40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2010-11 The Assistant Commissioner Of Sree Rayalaseema Galaxy Income Tax, Circle – 1, Projects Pvt. Limited, Kurnool. 40-304, Bhagyanagagar, Kurnool – 518004. Pan : Aaecs1589H (Cross Applicant) (Respondent/Assessee) Assessee By: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.A. Revenue By: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 22.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.07.2024

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Sr.AR
Section 10BSection 154Section 250

facts and in law. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) erred in admitting the appeal of the assessee after condoning delay of 1159 days. Condonation of delay is not warranted when assessee takes a conscious decision not to file appeal against the assessment order as held in the case of S.S Builders ... only a tax-neutral. The Ld.CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taken note of various facts, condoned the delay in filing the appeal and admitted the appeal for adjudication. The Ld.CIT(A) has also deleted the addition made by the AO towards the disallowance

Sri Vijaya Educational and Cultural Society, Challapalli vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Machilipatnam

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

ITA 258/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.258/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2017-18 ) Sri Vijaya Educational & Vs. Income Tax Officer, Cultural Society, Vijayawada Ward-1, Road, Challapalli, Krishna Machilipatnam-521001, District – 521126, Andhra Krishna District, Pradesh. Andhra Pradesh. Pan: Aaias6018H (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 22/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri K. Siva Ram Kumar, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 4

filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drew our attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along with a petition seeking for condonation of delay and read out the contents of the affidavit which is as under: “……….. 3. The appellant-society’s Secretary Sri Gorrepati Chandra Sekhara Rao (Aged ... reasonable and sufficient cause in 3 filing the appeal beyond the prescribed time limit with a delay of 43 days. Therefore, we hereby condone the delay of 43 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly

The Mundlapadu Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited, Mundlapadu Village vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 250/VIZ/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.250/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) The Mundlapadu Primary Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Credit Ward-1(3), Society Limited, Mundlapadu Vijayawada. Village & Post, Penuganchiprolu Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh – 521190. Pan: Aacat7977J (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Smt. A. Aruna, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 80A(5)Section 80P

filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drew my attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along with a petition seeking for condonation of delay and read out the contents of the affidavit which is as under: “……….. 2. Sri J. Srinivasa Rao is the CEO/Secretary and authorized signatory ... reasonable and sufficient cause in filing the appeal beyond the prescribed time limit with a delay of 06 days. Therefore, I hereby condone the delay of 06 days in 3 filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly

The ITO, Ward-1, Tenali vs. Jasti Lakshmaiah, Tenali

ITA 164/VIZ/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

For Appellant: Sri I Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 253(2)

filing of the appeal, the Ld. DR drew our attention to the affidavits filed by the Revenue along with a petitions seeking for condonation of delay and read out the contents of the affidavit which is as under: “ ….. …... In the case of Sri Koganti Bhavani Shankar / Jasti Lakshmaiah, upon authorization ... appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time limit, In this regard, the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal may kindly condone the delay in filing the appeal U/s. 253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates

The ITO, Ward-1, Tenali vs. Jasti Lakshmaiah, Tenali

ITA 163/VIZ/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

For Appellant: Sri I Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 253(2)

filing of the appeal, the Ld. DR drew our attention to the affidavits filed by the Revenue along with a petitions seeking for condonation of delay and read out the contents of the affidavit which is as under: “ ….. …... In the case of Sri Koganti Bhavani Shankar / Jasti Lakshmaiah, upon authorization ... appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time limit, In this regard, the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal may kindly condone the delay in filing the appeal U/s. 253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates

The ITO, Ward-1, Tenali vs. Smt Koganti Vijaya Kumari L/H of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali

ITA 162/VIZ/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

For Appellant: Sri I Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 253(2)

filing of the appeal, the Ld. DR drew our attention to the affidavits filed by the Revenue along with a petitions seeking for condonation of delay and read out the contents of the affidavit which is as under: “ ….. …... In the case of Sri Koganti Bhavani Shankar / Jasti Lakshmaiah, upon authorization ... appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time limit, In this regard, the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal may kindly condone the delay in filing the appeal U/s. 253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates

ITO, Ward-1, Tenali vs. Smt Koganti Vijaya Kumari L/H of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Guntur

ITA 161/VIZ/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161 & 162/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Smt. Koganti Vijaya Kumari Ward-1, Tenali. L/R Of Late Koganti Bhavani Sankar, Tenali, Guntur Dist. Pan: Clwps0224B (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.163 & 164/Viz/2020 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11) Income Tax Officer, Vs. Sri Jasti Lakshmaiah, Ward-1, Tenali. Tenali, Guntur District. Pan: Agapj3292P (अपीलधर्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधर्थीकीओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri I Kama Sastry, Ar प्रत्यधर्थीकीओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुिवधईकीतधरीख/ Date Of Hearing : 22/05/2024 घोर्णधकीतधरीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: These Appeals Are Filed By The Revenue Against The Orders Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Guntur

For Appellant: Sri I Kama Sastry, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 253(2)

filing of the appeal, the Ld. DR drew our attention to the affidavits filed by the Revenue along with a petitions seeking for condonation of delay and read out the contents of the affidavit which is as under: “ ….. …... In the case of Sri Koganti Bhavani Shankar / Jasti Lakshmaiah, upon authorization ... appeal could not be filed within the stipulated time limit, In this regard, the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal may kindly condone the delay in filing the appeal U/s. 253 of the Act keeping in view of the relaxation of certain provisions of specified Act extending the limitation dates