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.

170 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 220(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna469Delhi240Chennai170Mumbai119Karnataka101Pune89Kolkata83Ahmedabad77Bangalore51Jaipur49Cochin41Visakhapatnam40Hyderabad34Panaji30Lucknow22Nagpur15Indore14Guwahati11Chandigarh10Raipur9Jodhpur8Cuttack7Surat7Agra6Dehradun5Rajkot4Amritsar3Varanasi3SC2Ranchi1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 234E60Section 200A54Section 143(3)31Section 271(1)(c)28Section 220(2)26Addition to Income26Condonation of Delay26Section 26319Penalty

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY, CHENNAI

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2096/CHNY/2025[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Feb 2026

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

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. Vignesh Kumarasamy, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the Revenue for adjudication. 4. The main grievance of the Revenue is against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in allowing the deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on interest income earned from deposits maintained with Co-operative Banks of Rs.6,72,00,055/-. 5. Brief facts

INCOME TAX OFFICER, CHENNAI vs. RAILWAY EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED, CHENNAI

Showing 1–20 of 170 · Page 1 of 9

...
13
TDS13
Section 80P(2)(a)12
Natural Justice12

In the result, the both the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2095/CHNY/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, Addl. CITFor Respondent: Shri. Vignesh Kumarasamy, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

condone delay in filing of appeal and admit appeal filed by the Revenue for adjudication. 4. The main grievance of the Revenue is against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in allowing the deduction u/s.80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on interest income earned from deposits maintained with Co-operative Banks of Rs.6,72,00,055/-. 5. Brief facts

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI vs. THE RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1136/CHNY/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

For Respondent: Mr.R.Clement Ramesh –
Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

220(Guj) has been kept in view while deciding the issue. 20. In the result (i) the Revenue's appeal is dismissed; &(ii) the assessee's Cross Objection is allowed.” 6.6 By following the judgement of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee’s own case, in the case of S.E., S.E.C. & E. Co. Railways Employees' Coop. Credit Society

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI vs. THE RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1137/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

For Respondent: Mr.R.Clement Ramesh –
Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

220(Guj) has been kept in view while deciding the issue. 20. In the result (i) the Revenue's appeal is dismissed; &(ii) the assessee's Cross Objection is allowed.” 6.6 By following the judgement of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee’s own case, in the case of S.E., S.E.C. & E. Co. Railways Employees' Coop. Credit Society

ITO NON CORPORATE WARD 6(4), CHENNAI vs. THE RAILWAY EMPLOYEES CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., CHENNAI

In the result, the appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1138/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Abraham P.George & Shri Duvvuru R.L.Reddy

For Respondent: Mr.R.Clement Ramesh –
Section 148Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

220(Guj) has been kept in view while deciding the issue. 20. In the result (i) the Revenue's appeal is dismissed; &(ii) the assessee's Cross Objection is allowed.” 6.6 By following the judgement of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in assessee’s own case, in the case of S.E., S.E.C. & E. Co. Railways Employees' Coop. Credit Society

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2280/CHNY/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2283/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2282/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, SALEM vs. THRIVENI EARTHMOVERS PVT. LTD., SALEM

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 2281/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Sept 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2280, 2281, 2282 & 2283/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years :2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Vs. M/S. Thriveni Earthmovers Pvt Ltd, Of Income Tax, 22/110, Greenways Road, Central Circle, Fairlands, Salem Salem 636 016. [Pan Aabct 6759R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. M. Srinivasa Rao, IRS, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 148

condone the delay of two days in filing the appeals and admit the appeals for adjudication. Since, the identical facts and issues are involved in these 3. appeals, we proceed to dispose the same vide this common order. For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to 4. the appeal in ITA No.2280/Chny/2018 for assessment year

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3498/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3497/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3495/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3496/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3499/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3501/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3502/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3500/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3503/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

SSS CONSTRUCTIONS,CHENNAI vs. ACIT CPC , CHENNAI

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

ITA 3504/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.3495 To 3504/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 To 2015-16) M/S. Sss Constructions Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of 678, T.H.Road, . Income Tax, New Washermanpet, Cpc-Tds , Chennai-600 081. Ghaziabad. Pan: Abnfs 8664G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl.CITFor Respondent: 12.04.2022
Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

delay explained in condonation ion and did not decide on merits. This is unjustified and opposed to laws of natural justice. 2. In the absence of enabling provision relating to collection mechanism the action of CCIT(A)- TDS to recover the said fee by way of adjustment at the time of processing the TDS statement U/s 200A

MOHANRAJ,COIMBATORE vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3, CHENNAI

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

ITA 549/CHNY/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 548 To 552/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 To 2018-19 Shri Mohanraj Deputy Commissioner Of 76, State Bank Road, Vs. Income Tax, Coimbatore-641 018. Central Circle-3 Pan: Ahopm-2335-H Coimbatore. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. S.Sridhar, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26.02.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11.03.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench: These Five Appeals At The Instance Of The Assessee Are Directed Against Five Separate Orders Of Cit(A), Chennai-20, All Dated 16.02.2024, Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called ‘The Act’). The Relevant Assessment Years Are 2014-15 To 2018-19. 2. The Common Issue Is Raised In These Appeals, Hence, They Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Off By This Consolidated Order. Identical Grounds Are Raised Except For Variation In Figures.

For Appellant: Mr. S.Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms.T.M.Suganthamala, CIT
Section 153ASection 250Section 56

Delay condoned. 2. We do not find any merit in this petition. The special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed. 3. Pending application stands disposed of. 9. Similar is the decision of this Tribunal in the case of M/s Pearl Printers & Publishers Pvt. Ltd. (ITA Nos.1042/Chny/2023 dated 03-06-2024). The bench, under similar circumstances, held that the ratio of decision