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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 12A(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune255Mumbai213Delhi181Jaipur127Ahmedabad127Bangalore122Kolkata110Chennai95Hyderabad85Lucknow44Indore37Calcutta37Chandigarh34Cuttack34Surat32Nagpur24Rajkot19Amritsar18Karnataka16Visakhapatnam12Jodhpur12Raipur11Panaji10Patna9Cochin7Agra6Allahabad6Guwahati4Jabalpur2Ranchi2Varanasi2SC1Dehradun1Telangana1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 1129Section 12A23Section 139(1)11Section 142(1)8Exemption7Charitable Trust5Section 124Section 143(1)4Condonation of Delay

SACRED HEART PUBLIC SCHOOL KOTTAYAM,KOTTAYAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, KOTTAYAM, KOTTAYAM

In the result, the appeal and the stay application filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 423/COCH/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm

For Appellant: Shri P.V. Chacko, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 115BSection 12Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication 6. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The issue in the present appeal relates the eligibility of the appellant trust for exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. Admittedly, the appellant had not filed return of income under the provisions of section 139(1

4
Section 143(3)3
Section 2633
Addition to Income3

SREE ANJANEYA MEDICAL TRUST,KOZHIKODE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2 (1), KOZHIKODE

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

ITA 205/COCH/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin03 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K.Sree Anjaneya Medical Trust Acit, Circle - 2 17/501X-1, Kanchas Building Aayakar Bhavan Opp. Indoor Stadium Mananachira Vs. Rajaji Road, New Bus Stand Kozhikode 673001 Kozhikode 673004 [Pan: Aahts3844B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Surendranath Rao, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Girly Albert, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 147Section 2

condonation petition for delay in filing the application for registration u/s 12A [for the AYs under dispute] has not yet been decided by the CBDT and, therefore, the total incomes of the assessee were to be assessed as per commercial principles. The CIT (A) was also not justified in taking a similar stand that of the AO, without taking cognizance

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

COCHIN SHIPYARD EMPLOYEES MUTHUAL AND PUBLIC WELFARE TRUST,PERUMANUR vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, KOCHI

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

ITA 248/COCH/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jan 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.T. Mohanan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

12A of the Act. The appellant filed the return of income before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. However, admittedly the appellant trust had filed the prescribed audit report in Form 10B on 02.11.2022 whereas the return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act vide

COCHIN SHIPYARD EMPLOYEES MUTUAL AND PUBLIC WELFARE TRUST,COCHIN vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, KOCHI

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

ITA 249/COCH/2024[AY 2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Jan 2025

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Soundararajan K., Jm

For Appellant: Shri K.T. Mohanan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

12A of the Act. The appellant filed the return of income before the due date prescribed u/s. 139(1) of the Act after claiming exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. However, admittedly the appellant trust had filed the prescribed audit report in Form 10B on 02.11.2022 whereas the return of income was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act vide

KERALA BEEDI AND CIGAR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,KANNUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD , KANNUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 668/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: BEFORESHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri V M Veeramani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Leena Lal, (SR.AR.)
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

1,58,03,104/- instead of Rs.4,61,27,469/-. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but the assessee fails to succeed. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee filed Form 10B with delay which was condoned

KERALA BEEDI AND CIGAR WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,KANNUR vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 659/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: BEFORESHRI. INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBERAND SHRI. ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri V M Veeramani, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Leena Lal, (SR.AR.)
Section 11Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 270A

1,58,03,104/- instead of Rs.4,61,27,469/-. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) but the assessee fails to succeed. Being aggrieved the assessee filed an appeal before us. 4. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. The assessee filed Form 10B with delay which was condoned