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.

308 results for “condonation of delay”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,884Mumbai1,765Delhi1,115Pune1,017Bangalore979Kolkata878Patna658Hyderabad482Ahmedabad433Jaipur394Nagpur338Cochin308Chandigarh233Indore183Surat160Lucknow152Raipur146Visakhapatnam125Panaji123Karnataka114Cuttack104Amritsar103Rajkot97Dehradun38Agra36Jodhpur35Calcutta34SC32Varanasi23Allahabad23Telangana23Guwahati22Jabalpur12Ranchi9Orissa5Rajasthan3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana2Andhra Pradesh1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 234E85Section 80P69Section 200A54TDS47Deduction45Section 80P(2)(a)32Condonation of Delay31Section 20129Section 201(1)27

M/S. PARAVUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal and stay petition filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 767/COCH/2023[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Santosh P. Abraham, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R
Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

condoning the delay, para 8 of the circular would be a hurdle which is not questioned by the petitioner. The cited decisions has no assistance to the petitioner M/s. Paravur Service Co-operative Bank Ltd., Thiruvananthapuram Page 18 of 23 having regard to the factual aspect of the present matter. The petitioner has not explained the inordinate delay and laches

Showing 1–20 of 308 · Page 1 of 16

...
Section 143(3)23
Section 123
Limitation/Time-bar19

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, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. (3) 'Every day's delay must be explained' does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational, commonsense and pragmatic manner

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 202/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Cochin20 May 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.R Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

condonation of delay, relied on the submissions made before the CIT(A). As regards the issue on merits, the learned AR submitted that the same is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India reported

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 203/COCH/2021[2014-2015]Status: HeardITAT Cochin20 May 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.R Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

condonation of delay, relied on the submissions made before the CIT(A). As regards the issue on merits, the learned AR submitted that the same is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India reported

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GAZIABAD

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

ITA 201/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Cochin20 May 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.R Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

condonation of delay, relied on the submissions made before the CIT(A). As regards the issue on merits, the learned AR submitted that the same is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India reported

SABIR ALI,KANNUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 200/COCH/2021[2013-2014]Status: HeardITAT Cochin20 May 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Sri.R Krishnan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.J.M.Jamunna Devi, Sr.DR
Section 200ASection 234E

condonation of delay, relied on the submissions made before the CIT(A). As regards the issue on merits, the learned AR submitted that the same is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Olari Little Flower Kuries (P.) Ltd. v. Union of India reported

CHAKRABARTI EYE CARE CENTRE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 852/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekhar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

Deducted at Source (TDS) in Forms 24Q and 26Q for various quarters belatedly. The AO issued intimation u/s. 200A of the Act levying late fee u/s. 234E of the Act. The relevant financial year, amount of late fee charged u/s. 234E, various quarters and Form are detailed below: - ITA No. F.Y. Form Quarter Amount 850/C/2024

CHAKRABARTI EYE CARE CENTRE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 850/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekhar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

Deducted at Source (TDS) in Forms 24Q and 26Q for various quarters belatedly. The AO issued intimation u/s. 200A of the Act levying late fee u/s. 234E of the Act. The relevant financial year, amount of late fee charged u/s. 234E, various quarters and Form are detailed below: - ITA No. F.Y. Form Quarter Amount 850/C/2024

CHAKRABARTI EYE CARE CENTRE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ACIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, all the appeals by the assessee are treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 851/COCH/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekhar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

Deducted at Source (TDS) in Forms 24Q and 26Q for various quarters belatedly. The AO issued intimation u/s. 200A of the Act levying late fee u/s. 234E of the Act. The relevant financial year, amount of late fee charged u/s. 234E, various quarters and Form are detailed below: - ITA No. F.Y. Form Quarter Amount 850/C/2024

THE VELLATHOOVAL SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,IDUKKI vs. ITO, WARD 1 & TPS, THODUPUZHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 848/COCH/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K., Vp & Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am

For Appellant: Shri C.A. Jojo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 80P

deduction u/s. 80P of the Act on the ground that the return of income was not fled within the due date specified under the provisions of section 139(1) of the Act. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) with a delay of 1268 days. The appellant filed a petition seeking condonation

THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

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

ITA 409/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri M.Ramdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. A.R
Section 154Section 250Section 253(5)

condoning the delay of 96 days in filing both these appeals before this Tribunal and accordinglywe admit the same for adjudication. 4. Thebrief fact of the case are that the Assesseebeing an employees' co-operative society formed for the welfare of employees of Kerala Police department of Thrissur District and is registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.The Assessee

THRISSUR DISTRICT POLICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

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

ITA 408/COCH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri M.Ramdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. A.R
Section 154Section 250Section 253(5)

condoning the delay of 96 days in filing both these appeals before this Tribunal and accordinglywe admit the same for adjudication. 4. Thebrief fact of the case are that the Assesseebeing an employees' co-operative society formed for the welfare of employees of Kerala Police department of Thrissur District and is registered under Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969.The Assessee

M/S THE KASARAGOD TODDY TAPPERS AND SHOP WORKERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,KASARGOD vs. ITO WARD -1, KASARGOD

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 908/COCH/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A(2)(a)Section 5

condoning the delay of 1855 days. We decide accordingly. ITA Nos. 908 & 909/Coch/2022 (AYs: 2010-11& 11-12) Kasaragod Toddy Tappers and Shop Workers Co-operative Society Ltd.v. ITOO 5. The ld. CIT(A), however, without prejudice, and in the alternative, has discussed the appeal on merits as well.It is, in view of our decisionconfirming his order/s holding the appeal/sbefore

M/S THE KASARAGOD TODDY TAPPERS AND SHOP WORKERS CO-OP SOCIETY LTD,KASARGOD vs. ITO WARD 1, KASARGOD

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable

ITA 909/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Aby T.Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 260A(2)(a)Section 5

condoning the delay of 1855 days. We decide accordingly. ITA Nos. 908 & 909/Coch/2022 (AYs: 2010-11& 11-12) Kasaragod Toddy Tappers and Shop Workers Co-operative Society Ltd.v. ITOO 5. The ld. CIT(A), however, without prejudice, and in the alternative, has discussed the appeal on merits as well.It is, in view of our decisionconfirming his order/s holding the appeal/sbefore

KATTAPPANA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,IDUKKI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, THODUPUZHA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the stay application is dismissed

ITA 706/COCH/2023[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin21 Jun 2024

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ilaiyaraja K.S., Sr. D.R
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80Section 80P

condoned the delay in filing the return under Section 139 of the Act and argued that the return of income filed by the assessee is in order and therefore assessee is eligible for deduction

PAIRPRA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, WARD-1 & TPS, THODUPUZHA

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

ITA 768/COCH/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav, Jm Assessment Year: 2021-22 Paipra Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. .......... Appellant 11/266, Manary P.O., Ernakulam 686673 [Pan: Aaaap7650E] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & Tps .......... Respondent Thodupuzha Appellant By: Ms. Swathy S., Advocate Respondent By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 28.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 23.06.2025

For Appellant: Ms. Swathy S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d) of the Act in respect of interest income earned from other than co-operative societies. 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order refused to condone the delay

KOZHIKODE NAGARAM VANITHA SAHAKARANA SANGAM LTD,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), KOZHIKODE

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

ITA 226/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Kozhikode Nagaram Vanitha Sahakarana .......... Appellant Sangam Ltd. 18/151 D, Palayam Rahmatha Building Kallai Road Chalappuram P.O., Kozhikode 673002 [Pan: Aadak4509N] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Kozhikode .......... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Akhil Shaji, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 80P(2)

deduction u/s. 80P(2)(1)(a) of the Act on the ground that the appellant society is also dealing with nominal members, placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. v. ACIT 397 ITR 1 (SC). 3. Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A) with

VALLACHIRA SERVICE CO OP SOCIETY LTD NO 527,VALLACHIRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, THRISSUR

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

ITA 962/COCH/2024[2023-2024]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Apr 2025AY 2023-2024

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Sri.M.Ramdas, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Sr.AR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80P

delay has been condoned for filing the return of income, the AO may be directed to reconsider the claim of deduction

MULIYAR AGRICULTURIST WELFARE CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD,KASARGOD vs. THE ITO WARD 1 & TPS, KASARGOD

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

ITA 455/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2017-18 Muliyar Agriculturist Welfare .......... Appellant Co-Operative Society Ltd. 374, Bovikanam Post, Muliyar, Kasaragod [Pan: Aafam1658Q] Vs. The Income Tax Officer .......... Respondent Ward - 1 & Tps, Kasaragod

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 7. The issue in the present appeal relates to the eligibility of interest income earned by a co-operative society from co-operative banks. Since 4 Muliyar Agriculturist Welfare Co-op. Society Ltd. the issue is no longer res integra as it is settled by the decision

THE MULIYAR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD,KASARGOD vs. THE ITO, KASARGOD

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

ITA 86/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K.And Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Muliar Service Co-Operative The Income Tax Officer Bank Ltd. Ward - 1 & Tps Vs. Kanathur P.O., Kasargod 671542 Kasargod

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 80Section 80P

condoning the delay. Therefore this was a case where the CIT (Appeals) should have taken a pragmatic and liberal approach. The CIT (Appeals) failed to understand the decisions referred to in the impugned order in the right perspective 6. The CIT (Appeals) ought to have noted that the appellant is a registered Co-op Society classified as Primary Agricultural Credit