Search: condonation of delay

5 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 201(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 69A6 Section 249(3)6 Condonation of Delay5 Section 2504 Section 36(1)(va)3 Addition to Income3 Section 362 Section 1472 Cash Deposit2 Exemption2 Limitation/Time-bar2

ROYAL FURNISHER ,JAMMU vs. ASSESING OFFICER WARD- 2 (2), JAMMU

In the result appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 54/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

condoned. 4. Tersely we advert the fact of the case. The addition was made for delayed payment of PF and ESI amount of Rs. 4,16,169/-before the close of the financial year and Rs.71,818/- on 18.04.2018 related to EPF payable. The assessee filed an I.T.A. No.54/Asr/2022 4 Assessment Year: 2018-19 appeal before

TRANSWORLD MUSLIM UNIVERSITY DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE,BARBAR SHAH SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-( EXEMPTIONS), JAMMU

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

ITA 40/ASR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 147Section 249(3)Section 250

condone the delay of the assessee in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority being 91(ninty one days) for assessment year 2013-14 and 201 ( two hundred and one days ) for the assessment year 2014-15 and we remand both the appeals to the files of the ld. first appellate authority for admitting the appeals and adjudicating

TRANSWORLD MUSLIM UNIVERSITY DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE,BARBAR SHAH SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-( EXEMPTIONS), JAMMU

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

ITA 39/ASR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 147Section 249(3)Section 250

SHRI TARA CHAND S/O SHRI GOURI SHANKER ,KATHUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, KATHUA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 15/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 69A

delay of 44 days is condoned. The appeal of assessee is taken for hearing. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts dismissing the appeal, as assessee fail to file reply due to the reasons beyond his control. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), ABOHAR, INCOME TAX OFFICE, ABOHAR vs. RAJ KUMAR, ABOHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 622/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Jain, Adv

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 4. Grounds of appeal taken by the revenue in Form No. 36 are as follows (which is not concise in terms of Rule – 8 of ITAT Rules ’63): “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition