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.

24 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 194Jclear

Sorted by relevance

Kolkata32Mumbai29Chennai24Delhi23Hyderabad5Bangalore4Patna4Lucknow3Visakhapatnam2Indore2Jaipur2Rajkot2Surat2Varanasi2Ahmedabad2Amritsar1Raipur1Karnataka1Jabalpur1Cochin1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 14821TDS17Deduction17Condonation of Delay16Section 194J14Section 143(3)13Section 201(1)12Addition to Income12Section 4010

INFONET COMM ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD.,,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, TDS WARD,, SALEM

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

ITA 2842/CHNY/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2842/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Narayanan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

delay in filing of above appeal is condoned and appeal filed by the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee M/s.Infonet Comm Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., is engaged in the business of service provider for bandwidth communication sold by M/s. Bharthi Airtel Ltd and M/s. Reliance Communications Ltd. The assessee has entered

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

Section 143(2)10
Section 143(1)8
Section 40A7

IDUMBEN KNITTERS, ,TIRUPUR CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1TIRUPUR, TIRUPUR, CHENNAI

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

ITA 711/CHNY/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 711/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Idumban Knitters Assistant Commissioner Of S.F. No. 440, 443, Sbi Colony, V. Income Tax, Gandhi Nagar Post, Circle-1, Tirupur – 641 603. Tirupur. [Pan: Aaafi-7635-P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri. M A Srinivasan, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.08.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.08.2023

For Appellant: Shri. M A Srinivasan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri. D. Hema Bhupal, JCIT
Section 14Section 143Section 192Section 194JSection 270Section 40

delay in filing of appeal is condoned and appeal filed by the assessee is admitted for hearing. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The Petitioner is an Assessee /Appellant, being a partnership firm in the Name and style of M/s. ldumban Knitters, is an MSME, manufacturer, exporter and Traders of Garments of all kinds, having

SHANMUGASUNDARAM VENKATACHALAPATHY,TIRUNELVELI, TAMILNADU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 4, TIRUNELVELI, TIRUNELVELI

In the result, grounds of appeal raised

ITA 2056/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Chennai26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Ratnesh Nandan Sahayshri Shanmugasundaram I.T.O., Venkatachalapathy, Vs. Ward-4, C/O-Durv & Associates Llp, No. Tirunelveli. 10/80, Avm Avenue 3Rd Street, Virugambakkam, Chennai-600092 (Tamil Nadu) Pan No. Acapv 3414 B Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

condone the delay of 209 days in filing this appeal before the Tribunal and admit the same for hearing. 6. Now coming to the additional grounds raised by the assessee before us, it was found that the assessee has questioned the validity of assessment order passed 5 ITA2056/Chny/2024 Shri Shanmugaundaram Venkatachalapathy Vs ITO under Section 143(3) r.w.s

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1671/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1801/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1802/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1803/CHNY/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ACIT, KUMBAKONAM vs. CITY UNION BANK LIMITED, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 1804/CHNY/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

CITY UNION BANK LIMITED,KUMBAKONAM vs. JCIT, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 2034/CHNY/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

CITY UNION BANK LIMITED,KUMBAKONAM vs. JCIT, KUMBAKONAM

In the result, the appeals filed for the assessment year 2007-08 filed by

ITA 2035/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Dec 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri V. Vivekanandan, CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 194JSection 195JSection 40A

condoned and appeals are admitted. Similarly, there is a delay of 8 days in filing the appeals by the Revenue, we have considered the explanations in the affidavit and considered the delay and admitted the Revenue appeals. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: :- 3 -: ITA Nos.1671, 1801, 1802, 1803, 1804, 2034 & 2035/Mds/2014 3.1 The order

ORDAIN HEALTH CARE GLOBAL PVT LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE -5(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 211/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 211/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Ordain Health Care The Dcit, Global Pvt. Ltd., V. Corporate Circle – 5(1), Khivraj Complex Ii, Fourth Floor Chennai - 34 No.480, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai – 600 035. Pan: Aabco5860A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri R. Sandeep Bagmar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anitha,Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.11.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02.12.2020

For Appellant: Shri R. Sandeep Bagmar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anitha,JCIT
Section 194Section 250(6)Section 271Section 32Section 43B

section 271(1 )(c) of the Act without appreciating that there was no failure on the part of the Appellant in complying with notices during the course of assessment proceedings or any attempt to conceal income / furnish inaccurate particulars of income. 6. Relief 6.1 The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend and/Or withdraw the above ground of appeal

THOTTIAPATTI MUTHUSAMY MOHAN,NAMAKKAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE-1,, NAMAKKAL

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1327/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1327/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 Thottiapatti Muthusamy Mohan, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 629, Salem Road, Circle 1, Namakkal 637 001. Namakkal. [Pan:Aldpm2174M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 16.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 05.03.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-13, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Assessee Raised 6 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer By Passing Exparte Order In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. V. Supraja, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 194CSection 253(6)

194J (as per 26AS) are more than the receipts shown in ITR]. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer issued 4 I.T.A. No.1327/Chny/25 statutory notices under section 143(2), 142(1), 142(1) r.w.s. 129 as well as 142(1) r.w.s. 144 of the Act. However, there was no compliance from the assessee to any of the notices issued by the Assessing Officer

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. MOBIUS KNOWLEDGE SERVICES PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 3308/CHNY/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 Sept 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3308/Chny/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Smt. C. Yamuna, JCITFor Respondent: Shri L. Shibi, CS
Section 194JSection 40

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The first issue arises for consideration is disallowance of ₹73,13,850/- being the consultancy charges paid to non-residents, for non-deduction of tax under Section 40(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 4. Smt. C. Yamuna, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee

MYNAH INDUSTRIES LTD.,HOSUR vs. ITO TDS WARD, SALME

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 2436/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2433, 2434, 2435, 2436 & 2437/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2014-15, 2012-13 & 2011-12 M/S Mynah Industries Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.66, Mugalapalli Village, V. Tds Ward, Salem. Hosur – 635 105. The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pan : Aabcr 5484 M Circle(1), Hosur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.M. Mahidar, JCIT
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the assessee did not appear before this Tribunal even after taking note of the date of hearing by making endorsement in the appeal folder, we heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and proceeded to dispose of the appeals on merit. 4. I.T.A. Nos.2433 & 2434/Chny/2018 relate to levy of interest for non-deduction

MYNAH INDUSTRIES LTD.,HOSUR vs. ITO TDS WARD, SALME

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 2434/CHNY/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2433, 2434, 2435, 2436 & 2437/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2014-15, 2012-13 & 2011-12 M/S Mynah Industries Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.66, Mugalapalli Village, V. Tds Ward, Salem. Hosur – 635 105. The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pan : Aabcr 5484 M Circle(1), Hosur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.M. Mahidar, JCIT
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the assessee did not appear before this Tribunal even after taking note of the date of hearing by making endorsement in the appeal folder, we heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and proceeded to dispose of the appeals on merit. 4. I.T.A. Nos.2433 & 2434/Chny/2018 relate to levy of interest for non-deduction

MYNAH INDUSTRIES LTD.,HOSUR vs. ITO TDS WARD, SALME

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 2437/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2433, 2434, 2435, 2436 & 2437/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2014-15, 2012-13 & 2011-12 M/S Mynah Industries Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.66, Mugalapalli Village, V. Tds Ward, Salem. Hosur – 635 105. The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pan : Aabcr 5484 M Circle(1), Hosur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.M. Mahidar, JCIT
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the assessee did not appear before this Tribunal even after taking note of the date of hearing by making endorsement in the appeal folder, we heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and proceeded to dispose of the appeals on merit. 4. I.T.A. Nos.2433 & 2434/Chny/2018 relate to levy of interest for non-deduction

MYNAH INDUSTRIES LTD.,HOSUR vs. ITO TDS WARD, SALME

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 2435/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2433, 2434, 2435, 2436 & 2437/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2014-15, 2012-13 & 2011-12 M/S Mynah Industries Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.66, Mugalapalli Village, V. Tds Ward, Salem. Hosur – 635 105. The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pan : Aabcr 5484 M Circle(1), Hosur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.M. Mahidar, JCIT
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the assessee did not appear before this Tribunal even after taking note of the date of hearing by making endorsement in the appeal folder, we heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and proceeded to dispose of the appeals on merit. 4. I.T.A. Nos.2433 & 2434/Chny/2018 relate to levy of interest for non-deduction

MYNAH INDUSTRIES LTD.,HOSUR vs. ITO TDS WARD, SALME

In the result, the assessee’s appeals in I

ITA 2433/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.2433, 2434, 2435, 2436 & 2437/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2014-15, 2015-16, 2014-15, 2012-13 & 2011-12 M/S Mynah Industries Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No.66, Mugalapalli Village, V. Tds Ward, Salem. Hosur – 635 105. The Assistant / Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Pan : Aabcr 5484 M Circle(1), Hosur. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.M. Mahidar, JCIT
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 56(2)(viib)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the assessee did not appear before this Tribunal even after taking note of the date of hearing by making endorsement in the appeal folder, we heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and proceeded to dispose of the appeals on merit. 4. I.T.A. Nos.2433 & 2434/Chny/2018 relate to levy of interest for non-deduction

NALLUCHAMY SUSEENTHIRAM,CHENNAI vs. PCIT,RANGE 4,, CHENNAI

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

ITA 253/CHNY/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Y. Sridhar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri M. Rajan, CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194JSection 263Section 264

condone the delay in filing of this appeal by assessee and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The only issue in this appeal of assessee is as regards to revision order passed is bad in law as the assessment order is not prejudicial to the interest of Revenue and moreover, the AO has applied his mind to the facts

FUJI ELECTRIC INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

In the result the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 701/CHNY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Siddhesh Chaugula, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A R V Sreenivasan, C.I.T
Section 92C

condone the delay in filing the appeal and adjudicate the same on the basis of grounds of appeal raised. 3. Ground No.1 is general in nature and no specific argument has been raised for these grounds by the Ld.AR. Hence, Ground No.1 of the Assessee does not call for any adjudication. 4. Ground No.2 is in relation to transfer pricing