BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

19 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 12A(1)(ab)clear

Sorted by relevance

Calcutta36Mumbai27Ahmedabad25Hyderabad20Bangalore19Pune17Delhi16Jaipur15Chennai14Cuttack14Kolkata10Visakhapatnam5Chandigarh4Indore4Agra3Raipur2Jodhpur1Surat1Nagpur1Karnataka1Lucknow1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 271(1)(c)30Section 12A29Section 14826Section 14712Addition to Income12Section 1111Exemption11Limitation/Time-bar9Section 143(3)

SHRI HINGULAMBIKA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GULBARGA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, KALBURGI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1126/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Phalguna Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shahnawaz Ul Rahman, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

AB on 30.3.2022 is confirmed by Regular Registration in Form 10-AD on 21.9.2022. Thus, there is no element of after-thought in applying and obtaining the Registration after the levy of tax and during the course of proceedings before Tribunal as in the case relied on by Department. 5.14. The ld. A.R. further submitted that the second case

8
Natural Justice8
Section 686
Section 1436

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1267/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2016-17

For Appellant: Sri N. Suresh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 250Section 253(5)

ab), the person in receipt of the income has made an application in the prescribed form and manner to the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner, for registration of the trust or institution,— (i)where the trust or institution is registered under section 12A [as it stood immediately before its amendment by the Finance

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1761/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1765/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1766/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1763/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST ,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1764/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

M/S BANDANTHAMMA MATHU KALAMMA TRUST,MYSORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(4), MYSORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1762/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt.Beena Pillai, Jm

For Appellant: Sri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Manjeet Singh, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 143Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2

ab-into and also the appellate order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not in accordance with law, for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 3.12 As regard to the issue on merits of the matter is concerned the assessing officer in the impugned order of reassessment has made an addition

UBMC TRUST ASSOCIATION,UDUPI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised in the additional ground

ITA 693/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Ravi Shankar .S.V
Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 234ASection 250

ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. b. The authorities below failed to appreciate that it is settled position that "Consent does not confer jurisdiction", on the facts and circumstances of the case. c. The authorities below failed to appreciate that, mere participation of the appellant in the assessment proceeding cannot cure the jurisdictional defect which goes

UBMC TRUST ASSOCIATION,UDUPI vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS WARD-1, MANGALORE

In the result, both the appeals filed by assessee stands allowed on the legal issue raised in the additional ground

ITA 694/BANG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Shri Ravi Shankar .S.V
Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 234ASection 250

ab initio on the facts and circumstances of the case. b. The authorities below failed to appreciate that it is settled position that "Consent does not confer jurisdiction", on the facts and circumstances of the case. c. The authorities below failed to appreciate that, mere participation of the appellant in the assessment proceeding cannot cure the jurisdictional defect which goes

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2859/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

12A would not grant the assessee a blanket exemption to its income and the University would be required to prove that it satisfies the condition laid down in Sections 11 & 12 of the Act for considering its income to be exempt under the said sections. ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 5 of 14 On limitation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2858/BANG/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

12A would not grant the assessee a blanket exemption to its income and the University would be required to prove that it satisfies the condition laid down in Sections 11 & 12 of the Act for considering its income to be exempt under the said sections. ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 5 of 14 On limitation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2856/BANG/2018[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

12A would not grant the assessee a blanket exemption to its income and the University would be required to prove that it satisfies the condition laid down in Sections 11 & 12 of the Act for considering its income to be exempt under the said sections. ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 5 of 14 On limitation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2857/BANG/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

12A would not grant the assessee a blanket exemption to its income and the University would be required to prove that it satisfies the condition laid down in Sections 11 & 12 of the Act for considering its income to be exempt under the said sections. ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 5 of 14 On limitation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2854/BANG/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

12A would not grant the assessee a blanket exemption to its income and the University would be required to prove that it satisfies the condition laid down in Sections 11 & 12 of the Act for considering its income to be exempt under the said sections. ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 5 of 14 On limitation

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (E) CIRCLE-1 , BANGALORE vs. M/S VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY , BELAGAVI

In the result, the assessee’s cross objections for Assessment Years

ITA 2855/BANG/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Mar 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevanand Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Shri. Shivaprasad Reddy
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 274Section 3

12A would not grant the assessee a blanket exemption to its income and the University would be required to prove that it satisfies the condition laid down in Sections 11 & 12 of the Act for considering its income to be exempt under the said sections. ITA Nos.2854 to 2860/Bang/2018 C.O. Nos.136 to 142/Bang/2019 Page 5 of 14 On limitation

RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

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

ITA 703/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 142Section 143(2)

12A(a) and the annual receipts exceed Rs 10 crore and jurisdiction was with the Exemption Circle, the ITO, Ward - 7(2)(1) has transferred the case to the Exemptions Ward, Bengaluru, without proper authority and compliance with the S. Provisions. (v) As would be observed from the Ann. 0 Page 106, even after the case reached the Exemption Ward

MKH INFRASTRUCTURE,KERALA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 174/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Guru Kumar S., D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

delay in furnishing the details. The partners of the assessee firm are spread across many parts of South India. As a result of the short notice, the assessee firm could not produce the partners before the learned officer as time barring assessment was involved. 6.4 She submitted that the ld. AO was wrong in making the addition

M/S. EMIRATES HINDUSTAN BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS,KERALA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, MANGALORE

In the result, appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 415/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Sri Guru Kumar S., D.R
Section 132(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 68

delay in furnishing the details. The partners of the assessee firm are spread across many parts of South India. As a result of the short notice, the assessee firm could not produce the partners before the learned officer as time barring assessment was involved. 6.4 She submitted that the ld. AO was wrong in making the addition