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.

221 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 43(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai701Delhi590Mumbai489Kolkata290Bangalore221Ahmedabad184Jaipur183Hyderabad157Karnataka146Chandigarh141Pune118Nagpur75Surat61Amritsar59Indore58Raipur51Lucknow48Calcutta36Cochin34Visakhapatnam32SC26Cuttack26Rajkot19Patna18Varanasi13Guwahati13Telangana12Allahabad11Jodhpur7Dehradun7Panaji6Orissa5Rajasthan5Agra4Ranchi1Jabalpur1Himachal Pradesh1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Addition to Income53Section 234E52Disallowance45Section 25042Section 143(3)38Section 143(1)31Section 14830Condonation of Delay30Section 80P

M/S. RMZ HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 954/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 234Section 255Section 255(3)Section 36

condone the above delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The first ground for our consideration is with regard to the disallowance of Rs.99,02,829/-, which is claimed by assessee as an interest payment. The assessee in the year under consideration advanced a sum of Rs.41 crores towards purchase of shares. The AO questioned the sources of Rs.41

Showing 1–20 of 221 · Page 1 of 12

...
25
Section 36(1)(va)24
Section 143(2)24
Deduction20

EQUIPMENT FABRICATORS,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 386/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Oct 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Ganesh K. Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 23ASection 36(1)(va)Section 43B

condone the delay of 508 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 19. Coming to the merits of the issue, the grievance of the assessee is disallowance of Rs.11,78,481 being PF & ESI contribution of employees paid beyond the due date u/s. 36(1)(va) r.w.s. 43B of the Act. It was Page

SHRI. BORAIAH SHIVANANJAIAH,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 680/BANG/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Boraiah Shivananjaiah, Asst.Commissioner Of K. Janatha Colony, Income Tax, Bidadi Hobli, Vs. Circle - 3(2)(1) Ramnagara Dist., Bengaluru Bengaluru Pan – Anaps2762E Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Assessee by Sri Sreehari Kutsa, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 250Section 36(1)(va)Section 43ASection 43B

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. Accordingly, the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 6. Now we will proceed on merits of grounds raised by the assessee. The first ground is with regard to the disallowance of Employees’ Contribution to EPF beyond due date, by invoking Section 36(1)(va) of the Act. In our opinion

SRI.INDUDHAR,DAVANGERE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DAVANGERE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2281/BANG/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Mar 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT (D.R)
Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

5 that a liberal view and approach has to be taken while condoning the delay and the matter should be decided on merit instead of technicality. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Bijoy Kumar Almal 215 ITR 22 (SC). 6. On the other hand

NAVODAYA EDUCATION TRUST,RAICHUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, BELLARY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 49/BANG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Kaul, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Devarathna Kumar, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11(2)Section 11(5)Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 154

condone the delay in filing Form 10 electronically with the department. While entertaining such application, the Commissioner is required to satisfy that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause in filing Form 9A and Form 10 within the stipulated time. But this Circular does not preclude the assessee in filing Form 10 manually before the jurisdictional AO. The assessee

M/S APMG INDIA CERTIFICATIONS PVT LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX TDS, BENGALURU

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

ITA 3143/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Jun 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Apmg India Certifications Private Limited, The Deputy Regus Business Centre, E-1, Commissioner Of Ground Floor, Beech, Manyata Income Tax, Vs. Embassy Business Park, Centralized Outer Ring Road, Nagawara, Processing Cell-Tds, Bangalore – 560 045. Ghaziabad. Pan: Aaica5537D Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Deepak Chopra, Ca Revenue By : Shri K.N. Dhandapani, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 21.06.2019

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Chopra, CAFor Respondent: Shri K.N. Dhandapani, JCIT (DR)
Section 200ASection 234ESection 263

43 of paper book is the copy of letter dated 10.09.2018 submitted before the CIT(A) on 18.09.2018 and in this letter, the assessee has made request for condonation of delay. He pointed out that in para no. 2 of this letter, it was submitted by assessee before CIT(A) that the assessee was advised by its consultant to wait

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

SRI. M. NAGARAJA,MYSORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(1), MYSORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1905/BANG/2019[1999-2000]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Sept 2022AY 1999-2000

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 1999-2000

For Respondent: Shri S. Parthasarathi
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 234BSection 263

delay based on the above discussion. Accordingly, the condonation petition filed by the assessee stands allowed. 8. On merits, we have considered the submissions by the Ld. Counsel submitted vide written submission dated 1/08/22, and the records placed before us. On the contrary, the Ld. DR submitted that at stage of hearing, the assessee has not been able to establish

INDIANOIL SKYTANKING PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 407/BANG/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

43 liability is not part of assessment order passed u/s 143(3), if it is not specifically discussed in the assessment order, especially when there is no other section in the Act dealing with the assessment of DDT liability like the case of Fringe Benefit Tax assessment. He further submitted that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case

M/S. INDIANOIL SKYTAKING PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 299/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

43 liability is not part of assessment order passed u/s 143(3), if it is not specifically discussed in the assessment order, especially when there is no other section in the Act dealing with the assessment of DDT liability like the case of Fringe Benefit Tax assessment. He further submitted that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case

M/S INDIANOIL SKYTANKING PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 583/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy S

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumer Singh Meena, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 115Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)Section 80Section 80I

43 liability is not part of assessment order passed u/s 143(3), if it is not specifically discussed in the assessment order, especially when there is no other section in the Act dealing with the assessment of DDT liability like the case of Fringe Benefit Tax assessment. He further submitted that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 558/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 531/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 564/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 565/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 563/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 532/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 555/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 3(1)(1), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 557/BANG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham

M/S. PRAKAT SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-3(1)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 533/BANG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri. Ramakrishna Kamat, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Subramanian S, Addl. CIT (DR), ITAT, Bengaluru
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condoning the delay in filing of the appeal. 4. Reliance is also placed on the following orders of ITAT, Bangalore Kooud Software Pvt. Ltd. V The Dy. Director of Income-tax, CPC - TDS, Ghaziabad - ITA No.82 to 90/Bang/2022 Nagesh Consultants Vs. DCIT CPC-TDS Circle - 2(1.), Bangalore ITA No. 32/Bang/2023 dtd: 07-03-2023 Thomas Abraham