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.

118 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 282clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka122Chennai118Mumbai116Jaipur87Amritsar74Delhi65Panaji63Pune55Kolkata55Bangalore35Chandigarh32Hyderabad29Ahmedabad24Surat18Cochin14Cuttack13Indore12Rajkot12Lucknow11Raipur8Varanasi7Agra7Nagpur7Allahabad7Visakhapatnam6Jodhpur5Patna3Calcutta3SC2Guwahati1Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 153A59Section 234E40TDS34Addition to Income27Section 200A25Condonation of Delay23Section 143(3)22Section 26319Section 147

POOJA PRABHAKAR,CHENNAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD 15(1), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee for the A

ITA 3047/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Mr. R. Venkataraman, FCA &For Respondent: Shri. ARV Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 201Section 69A

condoned the delay, we further note that the ground of appeal relating to validity of the notice u/s.148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021 digitally signed and issued by the JAO on 01.04.2021 urged before us is predominantly legal in nature and go to the very root of the assessment proceedings. It is a settled proposition of law that where

Showing 1–20 of 118 · Page 1 of 6

16
Limitation/Time-bar13
Section 12A12
Section 12A(1)(ac)10

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA BHARAT LTD., TRICHY

In the result, appeal of the revenue being devoid of merits is dismissed

ITA 3156/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. M/S. Dalmia Dalmia Bharat Bharat Trichy Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu - Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu 621 651, Pan/Gir No.Aajcs 7366 K Aajcs 7366 K (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : N O N E Revenue By : Dr S.Palanikumar, Cit (Dr Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24 /2/ 2022 2 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/3/20 /2022 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg, Jm , Jm

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Dr S.Palanikumar, CIT (DR
Section 14A

condone the delay P a g e 1 | 17 Assessment Year : 2014-15 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The sole grievance of the revenue in this appeal is that the ld CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to compute the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) after excluding investment

M/S. BHARATHI RAJAA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2546/CHNY/2019[2011-12 (26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

delay in filing each of the above appeals be condoned and they may be directed to be decided on merits and due justice be rendered to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the ld.CIT(A) and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Alfa Properties

M/S. BHARATHI RAJAA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2541/CHNY/2019[2010-11 (26q-q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

delay in filing each of the above appeals be condoned and they may be directed to be decided on merits and due justice be rendered to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the ld.CIT(A) and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Alfa Properties

M/S. BHARATHI RAJAA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2542/CHNY/2019[2010-11 (26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

delay in filing each of the above appeals be condoned and they may be directed to be decided on merits and due justice be rendered to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the ld.CIT(A) and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Alfa Properties

M/S. BHARATHI RAJAA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2545/CHNY/2019[2011-12 (26Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

delay in filing each of the above appeals be condoned and they may be directed to be decided on merits and due justice be rendered to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the ld.CIT(A) and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Alfa Properties

M/S. BHARATHI RAJAA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2540/CHNY/2019[2009-10 (26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

delay in filing each of the above appeals be condoned and they may be directed to be decided on merits and due justice be rendered to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the ld.CIT(A) and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Alfa Properties

M/S. BHARATHI RAJAA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2543/CHNY/2019[2010-11 (26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

delay in filing each of the above appeals be condoned and they may be directed to be decided on merits and due justice be rendered to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the ld.CIT(A) and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Alfa Properties

M/S. BHARATHI RAJAA HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PVT. LTD.,,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2544/CHNY/2019[2010-11 (26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Dec 2019

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

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, CA for Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT

delay in filing each of the above appeals be condoned and they may be directed to be decided on merits and due justice be rendered to the assessee. 4. Per contra, the ld. DR supported the orders of the ld.CIT(A) and relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s. Alfa Properties

KELLER (M) SDN BHD,CHENNAI vs. DCIT INTL TAX 1(2), CHENNAI, CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1319/CHNY/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1319/Chny/2023 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2018-2019) Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Keller (M) Sdn Bhd, Income Tax, 7Th Floor, Centennial Square, International Taxation 1(2) No.6A, Dr. Ambedkar Road, Chennai. Kodambakkam, Chennai 600 024. [Pan: Aagck 8014M] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri. Ashik Shah, C.A. ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Nilay Baran Som, Irs, Cit.

For Appellant: Shri. Ashik Shah, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Nilay Baran Som, IRS, CIT
Section 133(6)Section 139Section 143(3)Section 147Section 154Section 239Section 263

condonation of delay 1 filed before the CBDT 1.1. Form 26AS of the Appellant for AY 2018-19 5 1.2. Form 26AS of the Appellant for AY 2019-20 9 1.3. Tax Audit Report in Form 3CA and 3CD of the Appellant 13 for AY 2018-19 1.4. Tax Audit Report in Form 3CA and 3CD of the Appellant

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2981/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (24Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2980/CHNY/2019[2014-15 (26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2987/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (26Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2978/CHNY/2019[2014-15 (26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2982/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (24Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2979/CHNY/2019[2014-15 (26Q-Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2984/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (26Q-Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2983/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (24Q-Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

M/S. THIRUMURUGAN PLASTICS P. LTD.,,THIRUMAZHISAI vs. ACIT, CPC,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2985/CHNY/2019[2015-16 (26Q-Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Dec 2019

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Respondent: Shri. AR V Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 200A

section 282 of the Act. In this case, the Revenue has not brought to our notice any such communication with the assessee. Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the reasons canvassed by the assessee towards the delay in filing the impugned appeals appears reasonable and sufficient on this count also and hence, we condone

K MOHAN RAJ,SALEM vs. ITO 1/ WARD 1-1, KRISHNAGIRI

Accordingly, W.P.Nos.27998 and 28000 of 2021 and W.P.(MD) No.11312 of 2021 are dismissed

ITA 1424/CHNY/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1424/Chny/2024 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Mr. K. Mohan Raj, The Ito, D.No.61/10, Ward-1(1), Travellers Bungalow Road, Krn Complex East, Old Pet, K. Theatre Road, Krishnagiri-635 001. Krishnagiri-1. [Pan: Arzpm 1267 H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148

condone the delay and proceed with the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee. The only relevant grounds of appeal are Ground Nos.14 & 15, the other grounds are merely describing facts. Therefore, only Grounds No.14-15 are taken up for adjudication. 3. Ground No.14 is a legal issue that after re-opening of assessment u/s.147 of the Income