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.

3 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 112clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka123Chennai118Mumbai89Delhi87Chandigarh75Kolkata56Bangalore54Ahmedabad52Jaipur50Calcutta39Hyderabad36Amritsar36Visakhapatnam28Panaji20Pune20Indore15Surat12Cuttack11Lucknow7Nagpur7Guwahati6SC6Patna5Rajkot5Agra4Raipur4Jodhpur3Allahabad3Cochin3Telangana2Dehradun1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 80P5Section 2503Section 54F3Section 143(3)2Section 80C2Section 144C2Deduction2Addition to Income2Natural Justice

KUNDOLY KRISHNANKUTTY SUNIL,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

ITA 547/COCH/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin22 Sept 2025AY 2016-2017
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54FSection 80C

Section 143(3) of the Act for the\n Assessment Year 2016-2017.\n2.\nThe present appeal was delayed by 86 days. In the application\nseeking condonation of delay it has been stated that the delay was\ninadvertently caused on account of the impugned order having been\nreceived in the spam folder. The Assessee only got knowledge of the\nimpugned

OLAVANNA SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED,CALICUT vs. ITO, WARD-2(3), KOZHIKODE

Appeal is allowed

ITA 86/COCH/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024
2
Condonation of Delay2
AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singholavanna Service Co-Op. Bank Ltd. The Income Tax Officer Olavanna Post Office Ward - 2(3), Kozhikode Vs. Kozhikode 673019 [Pan: Aaaao3624P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80P

Section 80P of the Act. The point of dispute here is that deposits are collected from nominal members and non-members who don't have say in running of the appellant society and any right on the profits of the appellant society and thus no identity between contributors to the surpluses and participators in the surpluses and thus the test

UTHUMAN SAHIB SHAJI,PATHANAPURAM vs. DCIT , CIRCLE, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 998/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin04 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Sri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R
Section 144C

section 144C of the Income tax Act to the present case. 5. The assessment order dated 19-07-2022 is barred by time 6. The assessment order dated 19-07-2022 is bad in law as the same has been passed without considering the Valuation Report and other evidences filed by the appellant. 7. The rejection of the valuation report