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.

92 results for “condonation of delay”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,082Chennai1,081Delhi742Ahmedabad670Pune495Jaipur457Kolkata432Bangalore418Hyderabad415Chandigarh305Patna296Raipur270Indore262Surat231Visakhapatnam190Amritsar184Lucknow170Rajkot170Nagpur159Agra158Panaji151Cuttack141Cochin92Jodhpur54Guwahati49Dehradun38Jabalpur34Ranchi28SC28Allahabad26Varanasi6A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 80P42Natural Justice35Condonation of Delay33Addition to Income31Exemption27Section 25026Section 143(3)24Section 14823Section 5621

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)

nature and not supported by any evidence. In our opinion, there is no good and sufficient reason in filing the appeal belatedly before this Tribunal. 4.1 Further, in case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji reported in 167 ITR 471 wherein held that when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice

Showing 1–20 of 92 · Page 1 of 5

Section 12A18
Section 271D17
Section 282(1)17

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 761/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

naturally introduces the consideration of all relevant facts and it is at this stage the diligence of the party or its bona fides may fall for consideration.” (emphasis supplied) 23. On the facts remedy of appeal. The averments made in the application seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO ,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 762/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

naturally introduces the consideration of all relevant facts and it is at this stage the diligence of the party or its bona fides may fall for consideration.” (emphasis supplied) 23. On the facts remedy of appeal. The averments made in the application seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANAGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 763/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

naturally introduces the consideration of all relevant facts and it is at this stage the diligence of the party or its bona fides may fall for consideration.” (emphasis supplied) 23. On the facts remedy of appeal. The averments made in the application seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 764/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

naturally introduces the consideration of all relevant facts and it is at this stage the diligence of the party or its bona fides may fall for consideration.” (emphasis supplied) 23. On the facts remedy of appeal. The averments made in the application seeking condonation of delay in filing appeals do not show any acceptable cause much less sufficient cause

LAURA ANN,SINGAPORE vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION,TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 262/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Dec 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishnan, CA

natural justice. Appellant prays that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) be set aside.” 4. The appeal has been filed by the assessee before this Tribunal with a delay of 362 days and the assessee had submitted the reasons in the delay condonation

SAYEGH PAINT FACTORIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. CORPORATE CIR 2(1), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 451/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr.AR
Section 144B(6)(vii)Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

condonation of delay before furnishing a tax audit report under Section 44AB. 8- The delay in filing audit report is legitimate, for reasons beyond the control of the company as the accounts are not adopted and there was a litigation pending with National Company Law Tribunal NCLT. 9-Also, reference is given to section 273B stating that no penalty shall

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)

justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of non-deliberate delay”. 3.7 The next question may arise whether delay was excessive or inordinate. There is no question of any excessive or inordinate when the reason stated by the assessee was a reasonable cause for not filing

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)

justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have vested right in injustice being done because of non-deliberate delay”. 3.7 The next question may arise whether delay was excessive or inordinate. There is no question of any excessive or inordinate when the reason stated by the assessee was a reasonable cause for not filing

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 52/COCH/2023[2015-16 (QT1)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

natural perspective, having regard to the compulsions of the circumstances of the case. This, it would be noted, is the stand of the Tribunal; we condoning the delay of 59 days in filing the instant appeals despite the application for condonation being not supported by any material; the deposition having a ring of truth to it. The argument is advanced

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 55/COCH/2023[2015-16 QUARTER 4]Status: HeardITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

natural perspective, having regard to the compulsions of the circumstances of the case. This, it would be noted, is the stand of the Tribunal; we condoning the delay of 59 days in filing the instant appeals despite the application for condonation being not supported by any material; the deposition having a ring of truth to it. The argument is advanced

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL ,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT , TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 53/COCH/2023[2015-16 QTR 2]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

natural perspective, having regard to the compulsions of the circumstances of the case. This, it would be noted, is the stand of the Tribunal; we condoning the delay of 59 days in filing the instant appeals despite the application for condonation being not supported by any material; the deposition having a ring of truth to it. The argument is advanced

NEW HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL ,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT , TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 54/COCH/2023[2015-16 (Qurt-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Aug 2023

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri Sreeram Sekar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

natural perspective, having regard to the compulsions of the circumstances of the case. This, it would be noted, is the stand of the Tribunal; we condoning the delay of 59 days in filing the instant appeals despite the application for condonation being not supported by any material; the deposition having a ring of truth to it. The argument is advanced

THE NEERIKODE SERVICE CO-OP BANK LIMITED NO 1682,NEERICODE vs. ITO WARD 3, ALUVA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed as not maintainable, and the stay applications dismissed as infructuous

ITA 954/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Jose, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

nature of contempt, as indeed, disruption of the due process of law.It is this disregard of it’s obligations that we seek to emphasize.The identity of the incumbent is irrelevant – which is something between the appellant and it’s employees. As such, it is of no consequence as to who the incumbent was over the period of delay; he acting

INFANT JESUS CHURCH,KOCHI vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 898/COCH/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : Na

For Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar P J
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 13(1)(a)

Natural Justice. 4. The commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption) ought not have reject the application filed u/s. 12A (1)of the Act by doing so the CIT (E) has gone against the decision of the honorable Gujarath High Court in The Commissioner of Income Tax Exemption Ahmedabad Vs Jamiatul Banaat Tankaria where the Court relied on the decision

HAREES HANEEFA,KOLLAM vs. DCIT CIRCLE INTL.TXN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as barred by limitation

ITA 286/COCH/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessmentyear:2016-17

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

nature without any supporting documents. It is settled position of law that now it is the cause behind the delay and not length of delay, which is to be seen by the court while exercising its discretion for condoning the delay. 6.1 Further, we would like to refer to the recent judgement of the coordinate bench of Cochin Tribunal

SAVE A FAMILY PLAN (INDIA),,KANJOOR vs. DCIT(EXEMPTION), KOCHI

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

ITA 138/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm Save A Family Plan (India) Dy. Cit, Exemption Aiswaryagram, Parappuram San Juan Towers, 2Nd Floor Vs. Kanjoor - 683575 Old Railway Station Road [Pan:Aabts9439E] Kochi 682018 (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abraham J. Markose, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 260ASection 263

delay in filing appeal stands condoned by the order passed by Third Member. We now proceed to dwell into the merits of the order passed u/s. 263 of the Act. 8. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the appellant is a charitable trust registered u/s. 12A of the Act and also enjoying registration under FCRA. The appellant trust

SEBASTIAN THOMAS KANICHAI,THRISSUR vs. ITO,WARD 1(1), THRISSUR

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

ITA 278/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Ms.Nivedita A.Kamath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 148Section 282(1)

condone the delay of 251 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. On the merits of the case, on a careful perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution. It is also revealed from the order of the CIT(A) that the notice is served through

KADAVATH AHMED REYAS,KASARAGOD vs. ITO, WARD 1 & TPS, KASARGOD

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

ITA 265/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Sri.Padmanathan K.V., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 282(1)

condone the delay of 433 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 8. On the merits of the case, on a careful perusal of the material on record, it is noticed that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine for non-prosecution. It is also revealed from the order of the CIT(A) that the notice is served through

SAYED MUHAMMED MUHAMMED KASIM,KARIMPUVLLA vs. ITO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 218/COCH/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin28 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri C A Jojo, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr. AR
Section 148Section 250Section 44A

condone the delay of 52 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the AO had taken the cash deposits in current account of the assessee as income. The AO also taken into consideration the payments made to the credit card and the cash withdrawals and the commission paid and based