Search: condonation of delay

5 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 249(4)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 143(1)12 Section 106 Section 36(1)(va)5 Section 249(4)4 Section 139(1)2 Section 2(24)(x)2 Section 253(3)2 Penalty2 Natural Justice

KANODIA INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CPC), BENGALURU

ITA 8/ALLD/2022[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Allahabad19 Jul 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri.Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year: 2015-16 Kanodia Investments Private Deputy Commissioner Of Limited Income Tax 1, Lukerganj, Allahabad, U.P. V. Centralized Processing Centre Bengaluru Pan: Aabck0604Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 249(2)(b)

delay of around 4 years , i.e. 1473 days, beyond the time prescribed under the provisions of Section 249(2)(b) of the 1961 Act. The ld. Sr. DR submitted that the assessee did not show sufficient cause before ld. CIT(A) for filing its appeal late beyond the time provided under the 1961 Act , and thus

COMMERCIAL AUTO SALES PVT. LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BENGALURU

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

KANODIA INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CPC), BENGALURU

COMMERCIAL AUTO SALES PVT. LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BENGALURU

KANODIA INVESTMENT PVT. LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. DCIT(CPC), BENGALURU

COMMERCIAL AUTO SALES PVT. LTD.,,ALLAHABAD vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CENTRALIZED PROCESSING CENTRE, BENGALURU

GYAN VIKAS SAMITI,AMBEDKAR NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER , AMBEDKAR NAGAR

GYAN VIKAS SAMITI ,AMBEDKAR NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, AMBEDKAR NAGAR

ALOK RAI,ALLAHBAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER NFAC DELHI, ALLAHABAD