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.

29 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 144C(13)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi116Mumbai96Kolkata30Bangalore29Hyderabad28Pune26Chennai23Jaipur11Indore7Ahmedabad6Nagpur3Visakhapatnam2Chandigarh2Cochin2Dehradun2Rajkot2Cuttack1Calcutta1Raipur1Agra1SC1Lucknow1

Key Topics

Section 15436Section 143(3)20Transfer Pricing15Condonation of Delay15Addition to Income13Section 92C12Limitation/Time-bar11Section 14810Section 143(2)

INMOBI TECHNOLOGY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE3(1)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 303/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Jun 2024AY 2017-18
For Appellant: \nShri Chaitanya, Sr. Advocate a/wFor Respondent: \nMs. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

section 142[1], either the Assessing Officer or the Prescribed Income- tax Authority, as the case may be, if, it is considered necessary or expedient to ensure that an assessee has not understated the income or has not computed excessive loss or has not underpaid tax in any manner, shall serve on the assessee a notice for attendance or production

YOKOGAWA INDIA LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 144C7
Comparables/TP7
Section 1446
ITA 1715/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: Disposed
ITAT Bangalore
11 Mar 2021
AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AOvocateFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 143Section 144Section 234BSection 253

section 143 (3) read with 144C of the Act, making addition of Rs.62,69,39,430/- to the total income of assessee. It has been submitted that, against the draft assessment order, assessee filed objections before DRP with a delay of 2 days on 13/04/2016. The DRP took a view that provisions of the income tax Act do not empower

PRACTO TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), BENGALURU, BANGALORE

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 311/BANG/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Feb 2025

Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sri Padam Chand Khincha, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 144C(10)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 153

condonation of delay in e-verification of the return. 3.9 The Assessee filed its objections with the Dispute Resolution Panel ('DRP') in Form 35A, as per section 144C(2) of the Act on 28.04.2023. The DRP issued its directions on 22.12.2023. Some issues were partially decided in favor of the Assessee. 3.10 Post receipt

M/S CONERGY ENERGY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2012-13 is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 88/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sudheendra, C AFor Respondent: Shri Sundar Rao Chintala, CIT-1 (D.R)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144C(2)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

condone the delay beyond the period specified for filing of objections under Section 144C(2) of the Act. Therefore the assessee's objections raised on merits were not addressed by the DRP. Consequently, the final order of assessment was passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(13

FLEXTRONICS TECHNOLOGIES (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,TAMILNADU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 832/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Dec 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajith Kumar Jain & Siddhesh Chaughale, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 92Section 92C

144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] by the ACIT, Circle 3(1)(1), Bangalore in relation to assessment year 2012-13. IT(TP)A No.832/Bang/2017 Page 2 of 8 2. There is a delay of 7 days in filing the appeal by the assessee which has been explained as owing to the absence of the Managing

SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC IT BUSINESS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED(FORMERLY KNOWN AS AMERICAN POWER CONVERSION (INDIA) PVT LTD.),BANGALORE vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LARGE TAX PAYERS, , BANGALORE

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

ITA 2002/BANG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore18 Mar 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Guru Prasad BL, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 250Section 263

144C of the Act. The assessee remained under the impression that the appeal was still pending before the NFAC. It was only during a routine review of pending appeals for the statutory audit that the assessee discovered that the NFAC had dismissed the appeal under the wrong assumption of facts that it was settled under the VSV scheme. 4. Upon

FLOWSERVE INDIA CONTROLS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2007-08 is partly allowed

ITA 1277/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.H.Sundar Rao, CIT (D.R)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

condone the delay in filing this appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for consideration and adjudication. It is ordered accordingly. O R D E R This appeal by the assessee is directed against the final order of assessment passed under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') vide order dt.23.9.2011

WALVOIL FLUID POWER INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TRANSFER PRICING - 2(2)(2), BANGALORE

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

ITA 1620/BANG/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Feb 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Sri Pavankumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.1620/Bang/2019 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) M/S. Walvoil Fluid Power India Pvt. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax, No.19, 2Nd Cross, 2Nd Main, Kiadb, Transfer Pricing 2(2)(2), Attibele Indl. Area, Attibele, Anekal Bangalore. Taluk, Bangalore-562107 Pan: Aaacw 5954E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R.E. Balasubramanyam, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, JCIT (D.R)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154

144C (13) of the Act. , Subsequently, the matter travelled to ITAT and the Assessing Officer has passed the order giving effect dt.18.12.2017 giving effect to ITAT order. Whereas assesses filed rectification petition u/sec154 of the Act against the said order. Subsequently, The assessee has filed an appeal against the order under Section 154 of the Act dt.24.04.2018. The CIT(Appeals

M/S. CRYSTAL GRANITE AND MARBLE PRIVATE LIMITED,RAMANAGARAM vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and Stay Petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 405/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahus.P No.29/Bang/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Rajgopal, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Vidya K, JCIT (DR)
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250

144C of the Income-tax Act or issuance of notice under section 148 as per time-limit specified in section 149 or sanction under section 151 of the Income-tax Act, and the time limit for completion of such action expires on the 30th day of April, 2021 due to its extension by the said notifications, such time limit shall

M/S TEJATS NETWORKS LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL , BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1674/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

144C of the Act dated 22.6.2015 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Circle-1, Bangalore. The said order was received by the assessee on 29.6.2015 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 3.11.2021. Thus, there was delay of 1694 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay on the reason

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 296/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

144C of the Act dated 22.6.2015 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Circle-1, Bangalore. The said order was received by the assessee on 29.6.2015 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 3.11.2021. Thus, there was delay of 1694 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay on the reason

TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 694/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

144C of the Act dated 22.6.2015 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Circle-1, Bangalore. The said order was received by the assessee on 29.6.2015 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 3.11.2021. Thus, there was delay of 1694 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay on the reason

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 1119/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

144C of the Act dated 22.6.2015 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Circle-1, Bangalore. The said order was received by the assessee on 29.6.2015 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 3.11.2021. Thus, there was delay of 1694 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay on the reason

TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 468/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

144C of the Act dated 22.6.2015 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Circle-1, Bangalore. The said order was received by the assessee on 29.6.2015 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 3.11.2021. Thus, there was delay of 1694 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay on the reason

M/S. TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 582/BANG/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

144C of the Act dated 22.6.2015 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Circle-1, Bangalore. The said order was received by the assessee on 29.6.2015 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 3.11.2021. Thus, there was delay of 1694 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay on the reason

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S TEJAS NETWORKS LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue in IT(TP)A No

ITA 621/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Feb 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.It(Tp)A Nos.296/Bang/2015 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Tejas Networks Ltd. Plot No.25, 5Th Floor Jp Software Park Acit, Circle-1, Ltu Vs. Electronic City, Phase I Bangalore Bangalore 560 100

For Appellant: Shri Jairam Raipura, D.RFor Respondent: Shri Annamalli & Shri Narendra Sharma, A.Rs
Section 154

144C of the Act dated 22.6.2015 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (LTU) Circle-1, Bangalore. The said order was received by the assessee on 29.6.2015 and the appeal was filed by the assessee on 3.11.2021. Thus, there was delay of 1694 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee attributed the delay on the reason

ASST.C.I.T., BANGALORE vs. M/S MILLIPORE (INDIA) LTD.,, BANGALORE

In the result, the cross objections are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 327/BANG/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raoit(Tp)A No.327/Bang/2015 (Assessment Year: 2009-10) Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Circle 4(1)(2), Bengaluru. … Appellant Vs M/S.Millipore (India) Ltd. No.50A, 2Nd Phase, Peenya Industrial Area, Bengaluru-560058. … Respondent Pan:Aaccm 1226 B & Co No.188/Bang/2015 (In It(Tp)A No.327/Bang/2015) (Assessment Year: 2009-10) (By The Assessee) Revenue By : Smt. Swapna Das, Jcit Assessee By : Shri K.K. Chaythanya, Advocate Date Of Hearing : 06/12/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/03/2017 O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am :

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Chaythanya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Swapna Das, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

section 92CA of the Act. The final assessment order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Act was passed by the AO on 26/05/2013. 3. Aggrieved by the above disallowances, the assessee- company preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) who, vide impugned order allowed the appeal in respect of issues on apportionment of interest on working capital, factory overheads

RAICHUR CITY URBAN CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,,RAICHUR vs. DIT, BANGALORE

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

ITA 1147/BANG/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Apr 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoshri Laliet Kumarraichur City Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Gunj Road, Raichur-584 102. . Appellant Vs. The Dy. Director Of Income-Tax Intelligence & Criminal Investigation, Bengaluru. . Respondent Appellant By : Shri B.S Sudheendra, C.A Respondent By : Shri G Kamaladar, Standing Counsel

For Appellant: Shri B.S Sudheendra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G Kamaladar, Standing Counsel
Section 246A(1)Section 253(1)Section 271FSection 283B

144C.] ITA No.1147/ /B/15 [(4) The Assessing Officer or the assessee, as the case may be, on receipt of notice that an appeal against the order of the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Assessing Officer in pursuance of the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel has been preferred under sub-section

MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1498/BANG/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranit(Tp)A No.1498/Bang/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Microchip Technology (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No.149-B, Epip 1St Phase, Income Tax, Industrial Area, Whitefield, Circle – 4(1)(2), Bangalore – 560 066. Bangalore. Pan: Aabcm 9868 J Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri. Darpan Kirpalani, Advocate Revenue By : Shri. Pradeep Kumar, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru. Date Of Hearing : 08.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.03.2021

For Appellant: Shri. Darpan Kirpalani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Pradeep Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92Section 92(1)Section 92B(1)

Section 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) in relation to AY 2013-14. 2. There is a delay of 2 days in filing this appeal which has been explained by the assessee as due to the Managing Director of the assessee not being available in Bangalore due to official work. The delay being

SAMI LABS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

In the result, IT(TP)A No

ITA 248/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No.248/Bang/2016 It(Tp)A No.2960/Bang/2018 Assessment Year : 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CITFor Respondent: Cherian K Baby, C.A
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 154

144C(13) of the Act. Brief facts of the case are as under: 2. It has been submitted that, assessee is a company engaged in export of standardised herbal extracts, fine chemicals, specialty chemicals, cosmeceuticals, fight or nutrients and probiotics. It carries its activities from several Page 2 of 14 IT(TP)A No.248/Bang/2016 IT(TP)A No.2960/Bang/2018 units including