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.

173 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 195(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi221Chennai173Mumbai169Karnataka105Kolkata79Bangalore56Ahmedabad38Jaipur36Calcutta35Pune35Visakhapatnam20Hyderabad15Lucknow13Indore12Chandigarh7Varanasi6Surat6Raipur5Rajkot5Cuttack4Agra3Amritsar3Nagpur3SC3Telangana3Cochin2Patna2Jodhpur2Andhra Pradesh1Panaji1Allahabad1Rajasthan1Orissa1

Key Topics

Condonation of Delay63Limitation/Time-bar54Section 13247Section 153A47Section 143(3)38Section 14821Section 4020Section 19514Addition to Income

H.NARAYANLAL,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1318/CHNY/2017[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2018AY 2006-2007

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. M. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 131

6) SC 242" had again pointed out that the length of delay does not matter. The pertinent observations are as follows: 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain

H.NARAYANLAL,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1319/CHNY/2017[2007-2008]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 173 · Page 1 of 9

...
14
Section 14712
Section 1112
Disallowance10
ITAT Chennai
23 Jul 2018
AY 2007-2008

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. M. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 131

6) SC 242" had again pointed out that the length of delay does not matter. The pertinent observations are as follows: 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain

H.NARAYANLAL,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1317/CHNY/2017[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2018AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. M. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 131

6) SC 242" had again pointed out that the length of delay does not matter. The pertinent observations are as follows: 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain

H.NARAYANLAL,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1316/CHNY/2017[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2018AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. M. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 131

6) SC 242" had again pointed out that the length of delay does not matter. The pertinent observations are as follows: 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain

H.NARAYANLAL,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1314/CHNY/2017[2002-2003]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2018AY 2002-2003

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. M. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 131

6) SC 242" had again pointed out that the length of delay does not matter. The pertinent observations are as follows: 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain

H.NARAYANLAL,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1315/CHNY/2017[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. M. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 131

6) SC 242" had again pointed out that the length of delay does not matter. The pertinent observations are as follows: 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain

H.NARAYANLAL,VELLORE vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1313/CHNY/2017[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2018AY 2001-2002

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. M. Sreenivasa Rao, CIT-DR
Section 131

6) SC 242" had again pointed out that the length of delay does not matter. The pertinent observations are as follows: 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain

DCIT, PONDICHERRY CIRCLE, PUDUCHERRY vs. INTEGRA SOFTWARE SERVICES P.LTD., PONDICHERRY

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in I

ITA 2189/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 195Section 40Section 92C

delay of 146 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal is condoned and the appeal of the Revenue is admitted. 3. Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee is engaged itself in the business of e- publishing. According to the Ld. D.R., the assessee-company undertakes editorial services, multilingual typesetting and data 3 I.T.A

INTEGRA SOFTWARE SERVICES P LTD.,CHENNAI vs. JCIT, PONDICHERRY

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in I

ITA 598/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Oct 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, CIT
Section 195Section 40Section 92C

delay of 146 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal is condoned and the appeal of the Revenue is admitted. 3. Dr. M. Srinivasa Rao, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the assessee is engaged itself in the business of e- publishing. According to the Ld. D.R., the assessee-company undertakes editorial services, multilingual typesetting and data 3 I.T.A

RANE ENGINE VALVE LTD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 885/CHNY/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

6. I stated that, the delay in filing the appeal is neither willful nor wanton. It is therefore prayed that in the interest of justice, the delay of filing the appeal may be condoned and grounds of appeal may be admitted and the appeal may be decided on merits and thus render justice.” On the other hand, the ld.Senior

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1497/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

6. I stated that, the delay in filing the appeal is neither willful nor wanton. It is therefore prayed that in the interest of justice, the delay of filing the appeal may be condoned and grounds of appeal may be admitted and the appeal may be decided on merits and thus render justice.” On the other hand, the ld.Senior

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 2815/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

6. I stated that, the delay in filing the appeal is neither willful nor wanton. It is therefore prayed that in the interest of justice, the delay of filing the appeal may be condoned and grounds of appeal may be admitted and the appeal may be decided on merits and thus render justice.” On the other hand, the ld.Senior

RANE ENGINE VALVES LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1498/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

6. I stated that, the delay in filing the appeal is neither willful nor wanton. It is therefore prayed that in the interest of justice, the delay of filing the appeal may be condoned and grounds of appeal may be admitted and the appeal may be decided on merits and thus render justice.” On the other hand, the ld.Senior

RANE ENGINE VALVE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5 (1), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for assessment year 2012-13 in ITA No

ITA 1477/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai03 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Suresh, JCIT
Section 143(3)

6. I stated that, the delay in filing the appeal is neither willful nor wanton. It is therefore prayed that in the interest of justice, the delay of filing the appeal may be condoned and grounds of appeal may be admitted and the appeal may be decided on merits and thus render justice.” On the other hand, the ld.Senior

M/S ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT,CORPORATE CIRCLE, CHENNAI

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

ITA 797/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

195 of the Act. However, confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer towards disallowance of foreign exchange loss u/s. 37(1) of the Act. Aggrieved by the ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 304 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal

DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. ABAN OFFSHORE LTD., CHENNAI

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

ITA 1672/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

195 of the Act. However, confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer towards disallowance of foreign exchange loss u/s. 37(1) of the Act. Aggrieved by the ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 304 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal

ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 2757/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

195 of the Act. However, confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer towards disallowance of foreign exchange loss u/s. 37(1) of the Act. Aggrieved by the ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 304 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal

M/S. ABAN OFFSHORE LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. DCITCORPORATE CIRCLE1(1), CHENNAI

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

ITA 798/CHNY/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri Manjunatha. G, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./It(Tp)A Nos.: 21/Chny/2022 & 40/Chny/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2017-18 & 2018-19 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Tpo Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.: 797 & 798/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2011-12 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2757/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon V. Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1672/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Aban Offshore Limited, Deputy Commissioner Of V. 113, Janpriya Crestpantheon Income Tax, Road, Egmore, Corporate Circle -1(1), Chennai – 600 008. Chennai. [Pan: Aaaca-3012-H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri. P. Murali Mohana Rao, Ca Assessee By Department By : Shri. A. Sasikumar, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2023 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.11.2023

For Respondent: Shri. A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 147Section 148Section 37(1)

195 of the Act. However, confirmed additions made by the Assessing Officer towards disallowance of foreign exchange loss u/s. 37(1) of the Act. Aggrieved by the ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. At the outset, we find that there is a delay of 304 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal

STANDARD CHARTERED GLOBAL BUSINESS SERVICES PVT. LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2) , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1962/CHNY/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1961 To 1964/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Standard Chartered Global Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Business Services Pvt.Ltd., International Taxation 2(2), [Formerly Known As Scope 62, Greams Road, International Pvt.Ltd.] Thousand Lights, No.1, Haddows Road, Chennai6-600 006. Nungambakkam. Chennai-600 006. Pan:Aaecs9043E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. R.Anitha, JCIT
Section 195Section 195(2)Section 248

6. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly opposing condonation of delay petition filed by the assessee submitted that the reasons given by assessee do not come within the ambit of reasonable and bonafide reasons, which cannot be considered for condonation of delay and hence, appeal filed by the assessee may be dismissed as not maintainable. 7. Having heard

STANDARD CHARTERED GLOBAL BUSINESS SERVICES PVT. LTD. ,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 2(2) , CHENNAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 1961/CHNY/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Dec 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.1961 To 1964/Chny/2017 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Standard Chartered Global Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Business Services Pvt.Ltd., International Taxation 2(2), [Formerly Known As Scope 62, Greams Road, International Pvt.Ltd.] Thousand Lights, No.1, Haddows Road, Chennai6-600 006. Nungambakkam. Chennai-600 006. Pan:Aaecs9043E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. R.Anitha, JCIT
Section 195Section 195(2)Section 248

6. The learned DR, on the other hand, strongly opposing condonation of delay petition filed by the assessee submitted that the reasons given by assessee do not come within the ambit of reasonable and bonafide reasons, which cannot be considered for condonation of delay and hence, appeal filed by the assessee may be dismissed as not maintainable. 7. Having heard