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.

449 results for “condonation of delay”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,157Chennai3,074Delhi2,684Kolkata2,106Pune1,595Hyderabad1,333Ahmedabad1,221Bangalore1,178Jaipur818Chandigarh637Surat519Visakhapatnam459Cochin449Indore419Patna384Raipur368Amritsar345Lucknow343Cuttack328Nagpur327Rajkot235Karnataka212Agra201Panaji145Calcutta123Guwahati113Jodhpur95Dehradun77Jabalpur66Allahabad62Telangana38Varanasi35Ranchi33SC27Kerala7Andhra Pradesh6Rajasthan6Orissa6Himachal Pradesh3Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income56Section 143(3)47Condonation of Delay47Section 20031TDS28Section 206C27Section 19227Section 80P26Section 234E23

M/S.AL ZARAFA TRAVELS & MANPOWER CONSULTANTS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 519/COCH/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153CSection 179Section 230

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the delay in filing the appeal is on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 3. Since condonation of delay in filing the appeal is purely the discretion of the CIT (Appeals), the assessing officer has erred in objecting to the condonation of delay, that

M/S.AL ZARAFA TRAVELS & MANPOWER CONSULTANTS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM

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

Showing 1–20 of 449 · Page 1 of 23

...
Cash Deposit22
Deduction20
Limitation/Time-bar19
ITA 522/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Feb 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153CSection 179Section 230

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the delay in filing the appeal is on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 3. Since condonation of delay in filing the appeal is purely the discretion of the CIT (Appeals), the assessing officer has erred in objecting to the condonation of delay, that

M/S.AL ZARAFA TRAVELS & MANPOWER CONSULTANTS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 518/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Feb 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153CSection 179Section 230

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the delay in filing the appeal is on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 3. Since condonation of delay in filing the appeal is purely the discretion of the CIT (Appeals), the assessing officer has erred in objecting to the condonation of delay, that

M/S.AL ZARAFA TRAVELS & MANPOWER CONSULTANTS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 520/COCH/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153CSection 179Section 230

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the delay in filing the appeal is on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 3. Since condonation of delay in filing the appeal is purely the discretion of the CIT (Appeals), the assessing officer has erred in objecting to the condonation of delay, that

M/S.AL ZARAFA TRAVELS & MANPOWER CONSULTANTS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 523/COCH/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153CSection 179Section 230

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the delay in filing the appeal is on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 3. Since condonation of delay in filing the appeal is purely the discretion of the CIT (Appeals), the assessing officer has erred in objecting to the condonation of delay, that

M/S.AL ZARAFA TRAVELS & MANPOWER CONSULTANTS P. LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. THE ACIT, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 521/COCH/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Feb 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 153CSection 179Section 230

Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have considered the fact that the delay in filing the appeal is on account of reasons beyond the control of the appellant. 3. Since condonation of delay in filing the appeal is purely the discretion of the CIT (Appeals), the assessing officer has erred in objecting to the condonation of delay, that

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 171/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 170/COCH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 172/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 167/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 166/COCH/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 164/COCH/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI VARGHESE M.UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

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

ITA 161/COCH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI VARGHESE M.UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT,CEN-CIRCLE-2, KOCHI

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

ITA 162/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 169/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 168/COCH/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 165/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

SRI.VARUGEHESE M. UTHUP,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, CEN-CIRCLE,, KOCHI

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

ITA 163/COCH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 132Section 144Section 153ASection 249(2)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

additions made by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, it was submitted that on the same logic, the delay in filing the present appeals may be condoned and remitted to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issue on merit. The Ld. AR also filed written submissions on this count which is placed on record. 5. The Ld. DR submitted

M/S KADIRUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

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

ITA 104/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Kadirur Service Co- Operative Bank Ltd., The Income Tax Kadirur, Officer, Thalassery, Ward – 2, Kannur, Kannur. Kerala – 670 642. Vs. Pan: Aaffk6859E Appellant Respondent : Shri Arun Raj .S, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ilayaraja K.S, Sr. Dr

For Respondent: Shri Arun Raj .S
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 51Section 80p

condoned. 3. The Ld.AR further submitted that, there is delay of 1425 days in filing appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Page 7 of 16 4. It is submitted that in Form 35, the assessee stated the reason for the delay caused in filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), as under: “1. The assessment order dated dated

MAGGY SUNNY( PROP.SUNNY JACOB JEWELLERS 916 KERALA SHOWROOM,TRIVANDRUM vs. THEITO, WD-3, KOTTAYAM

In the result, both the appeal and the Stay Petition filed by the assessee are

ITA 258/COCH/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Sept 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Cochin Bench, may kindly be pleased to set aside the addition of Rs. 93,56,364/- made by the Assessing Officer and sustained by the CIT(A), allow the appeal and render justice. 3. There was a delay of 1038 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has explained the reasons