← 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

Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Ramana Choudary, Rajahmundry vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, five appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 52/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. After considering the submissions of the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC discussed the issue at length and concluded (vide para 6.21 of his order) that in the absence of sufficient cause ... time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering

Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Ramana Choudary, Rajahmundry vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, five appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 51/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. After considering the submissions of the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC discussed the issue at length and concluded (vide para 6.21 of his order) that in the absence of sufficient cause ... time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering

Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Ramana Choudary, Rajahmundry vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, five appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 50/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. After considering the submissions of the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC discussed the issue at length and concluded (vide para 6.21 of his order) that in the absence of sufficient cause ... time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering

Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Ramana Choudary, Rajahmundry vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, five appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 49/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. After considering the submissions of the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC discussed the issue at length and concluded (vide para 6.21 of his order) that in the absence of sufficient cause ... time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering

Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Ramana Choudary, Rajahmundry vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, five appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 48/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. After considering the submissions of the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC discussed the issue at length and concluded (vide para 6.21 of his order) that in the absence of sufficient cause ... time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering

Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Ramana Choudary, Rajahmundry vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, five appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 47/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. After considering the submissions of the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC discussed the issue at length and concluded (vide para 6.21 of his order) that in the absence of sufficient cause ... time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering

Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Ramana Choudary, Rajahmundry vs. Income Tax Officer, TDS Ward-1, Rajahmundry

In the result, five appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 46/VIZ/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.46 To 67/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2016-17) Rimmalpudi Bhaskara Pattabhi Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ramana Choudary, Tds, Ward-1, Rajahmundry. Rajahmundry. Pan: Afcpr 2275 M (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 16/03/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/03/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao
Section 200ASection 234E

days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A)-NFAC. After considering the submissions of the assessee on the issue of condonation of delay, the Ld. CIT(A)- NFAC discussed the issue at length and concluded (vide para 6.21 of his order) that in the absence of sufficient cause ... time as per the TDS provisions and imposed late fees u/s. 234E of the Act. On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Appellate Authority and confirmed the action of the Ld. AO and dismissed the assessee’s appeal. 8. Considering

Shri Sharad Sharma, Bhopal vs. ACIT ()Central), Gwalior, Bhopal

ITA 80/IND/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Sharad Sharma Acit (Central), H-3B, Nishant Colony, Gwalior बनाम/ 74 Banglows, T.T. Nagar, Vs. Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent / Revenue) Pan: Amzps 9791D Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.03.2023

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 263

that the present appeal has been filed after a delay of 13 days. He submitted that the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is on record. He submitted that after the receipt of the order appealed against, the assessee discussed the matter with his regular counsel ... attributable to willful default of assessee and it has happened due to a reasonable circumstance. Ld. AR made a humble prayer to condone the delay. We confronted Ld. DR representing the revenue who did not show any objection. In view of this, the delay is condoned and the appeal

Sureshbhai Sukhabhai Mistry, Na vs. Arivs.ITO, Ward 5, Navasari

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

ITA 263/SRT/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat31 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhआ.अ.सं./Ita No.263/Srt/2022 (Ay 2011-12) (Hearing In Virtual Court) Sureshbhai Sukhabhai Mistry Income Tax Officer, 130, Kumbhar Faliya, Via Ward-5, Navsari Vs Satem, Tal: Navsari, Dist. Navsari-396466 Pan No: Ammpm 4411 H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By Shri Sujesh C Suratwala, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 30.01.2023 उ"घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 31.03.2023 Pronouncement Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act Per Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [For Short To As “Nfac/Ld.Cit(A)”] Dated 05.05.2022 For Assessment Year 2011-12, Which In Turn Arises From The Addition Made By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-5, Navsari / Assessing Officer In Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Dated 13.09.2017. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- Suresshbhai S Mistry “1. The Learned Ao As Well As Learned Nfac/Cit(A) Has Erred In Making Addition To The Total Income Of The Assessee Which Is Primarily Agriculture Inn Nature & In Fact Exempted To Tax

Section 133(6)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 254(1)

Thus, the appeal is barred by limitation of 63 days in filing appeal before Tribunal. The assessee filed an application supported affidavit for condonation of delay. The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee submits that there is delay of 63 days in filing appeal before Tribunal ... other hand, Ld. Senior Departmental-Representative (Ld.Sr-DR) for the Revenue submits that assessee is a casual in pursuing his appeal and in condonation of delay, no reasonable and plausible explanation corroborated by assessee so the cause of delay may not be granted. 8 Suresshbhai S Mistry 8. I have

Pilli Raja Raghavendra, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, . Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed for the A

ITA 96/VIZ/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam30 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.96/Viz/2019 & 97/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) Pilli Raja Raghavendra Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax D.No.45-57-10/1/1 Central Circle-2 Narasimha Nagar Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Bpfpp8326B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 29.03.2023 : Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of 29.03.2023 : Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : Condonation of Delay : These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-3 vide Order dated ... Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2012- 13 with the delay of 54 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay, submitting that Sri P.Nooka Raju, father of the assessee who manages the affairs of the assessee, fell sick and he was advised bed rest 2 I.T.A

Medsave Health Insurance Tpa Limited, Delhi vs. ACIT, CPC TDS, Ghaziabad

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 1016/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Bansal, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 154Section 194Section 194JSection 200ASection 201Section 250Section 271C

years 1 month 26 days 2019-20 07.11.2019 13.01.2021 1 year 2 months 6 days 8.1 The Assessee before the ld. Commissioner for condonation of delay claimed as under:- "In respect of above, it is submitted as under: 1. The CFO, Mr. P.K. Kaul of the company, left the services ... moto but the same has not been done. 5. Left with no choice we are filing this appeal with a request to condone the delay on the ground mentioned above." 8.2. The Ld. Commissioner by considering the delay period and contentions of the Assessee, declined to condone the delay

Soumya Tradecom Pvt Ltd, Aligarh vs. ACIT (OSD) Ward - 24(!), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 400/DEL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhryassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Sunil Gupta, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Sh. Girish Kumar Kohli, Ld. Sr
Section 147Section 250

Affidavit confirming the said facts is enclosed. 6. That in the facts and circumstances of the case we request this Hon’ble ITAT condone the delay in filing the appeal and further request to regularize the appeal.” 3. We have given thoughtful consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances ... case and the reasons given by the Assessee for condonation of delay in filing the instant appeal. The Assessee claimed that Shri Mithlessh Kumar Aggarwal who was looking after the case of the Assessee was not keeping well since November, 2018 and therefore, could not appear before

Pilli Raja Raghavendra, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, . Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed for the A

ITA 97/VIZ/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.96/Viz/2019 & 97/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2010-11 & 2012-13) Pilli Raja Raghavendra Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax D.No.45-57-10/1/1 Central Circle-2 Narasimha Nagar Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Bpfpp8326B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 29.03.2023 : Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153C

Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of 29.03.2023 : Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : Condonation of Delay : These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-3 vide Order dated ... Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2012- 13 with the delay of 54 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay, submitting that Sri P.Nooka Raju, father of the assessee who manages the affairs of the assessee, fell sick and he was advised bed rest 2 I.T.A

Pilli Santhosh Krishna, Visakhapatnam vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, . Central Circle-2, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 95/VIZ/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.93/Viz/2019 To 95/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2012-13) Pilli Santosh Krishna Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax D.No.45-57-10/1/1 Central Circle-2 Narasimha Nagar Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Bpfpp8326B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, Cit(Dr) सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 29.03.2023 : Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153C

Hearing : 21.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of 29.03.2023 : Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member : Condonation of Delay : These appeals are filed by the assessee against the orders of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-3 vide Order dated ... Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2008-09, 2009-10 and 2012- 13 with the delay of 54 days. The assessee filed petition for condonation of delay, submitting that Sri P.Nooka Raju, father of the assessee who manages the affairs of the assessee, fell sick and he was advised bed rest 2 I.T.A

Mahesh Agarwal, Jaipur vs. ACIT - 6, Jaipur

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

ITA 4/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Sunder Goyal, FCAFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 10(38)Section 134ASection 143(3)Section 68Section 69C

order shall not prejudice the decision which may be taken in respect of electronically filed appeal against the same order alongwith application for condonation of delay which shall be treated as separate, belated appeal and shall be decided as per law. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is treated ... restored the matter to the file of learned Commissioner (a) under identical circumstances with a direction do decide appeal afresh on merit, after condoning the delay, if any. Since in the present case, we find that appeal in the paper form was already with learned Commissioner (Appeals), therefore in that

Om Prakash Kharol, Jaipur vs. ITO, WD4(3), Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 442/JPR/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessee. 4. We have heard ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. The Bench Noted that the assessee for condonation of delay of 11 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the ld DR. Thus the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal

Om Prakash Kharol, Jaipur vs. ITO, WD4(3), Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 441/JPR/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessee. 4. We have heard ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. The Bench Noted that the assessee for condonation of delay of 11 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the ld DR. Thus the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal

Om Prakash Kharol, Jaipur vs. ITO, WD4(3(, Jaipur

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 440/JPR/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148

assessee. 4. We have heard ld. DR and perused the materials available on record. The Bench Noted that the assessee for condonation of delay of 11 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the ld DR. Thus the delay of 11 days in filing the appeal

Dinesh Kumar Sharma, Jaipur vs. ITO, Ward 4(3), Jaipur

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

ITA 36/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Mar 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’ble SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri H.M. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 148Section 154Section 194J

delay 18 days in filing the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation of delay mentioning therein the reason that staff was in the impression that since the appeal had been filed online on 8-01-2022 and there ... need to file it manually and this negligence took place because of wrong impression. The ld.AR of the assessee prayed to condone the delay because of unintentional delay by the staff. 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR objected to such delay but left the matter on the Bench

Shri Narbarda Parsad Gupta, Surajpur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 2, Sarguja

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in terms of my aforesaid observations

ITA 205/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.205/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Narbarda Prasad Gupta, S/O. Hari Prasad Gupta, Vill. Darripara, P.O-Bhaiyathan, Surajpur-497 231 (C.G.) Pan : Aujpg0494R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Ambikapur, Dist. Sarguja. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44A

same in all fairness be condoned. 3. The Ld. Departmental Representative (for short ‘DR’) did not raise any objection to the seeking of condonation of delay by the assessee appellant. 4. I have given a thoughtful consideration and find substance in the claim of the Ld. AR that the delay