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.

6 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 198clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai110Karnataka105Delhi69Bangalore66Kolkata63Chennai59Chandigarh58Pune39Jaipur38Calcutta36Lucknow22Surat22Hyderabad19Cuttack12Indore7Visakhapatnam6Cochin6Ahmedabad6Ranchi5Guwahati5Patna5Nagpur3SC3Andhra Pradesh2Rajasthan1Rajkot1Raipur1Amritsar1Allahabad1Telangana1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 80P(2)(a)12Section 271D10Section 80P10Section 80P(4)6Section 143(3)4Limitation/Time-bar4Addition to Income3Deduction3Disallowance

INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY P.O vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 165/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.P.T.Joy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271D

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered under the provisions of the Act and run various educational institutions. During the assessment year 2012- 2013, the assessment was made without any additions to the income returned by the assessee. On going through the documents

INDIRA GANDHI MEMORIAL TRUST,NELLIKUZHY, KOTHAMANGALAM vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTION), ERNAKULAM

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

3
Section 269S2
Section 2632
Cash Deposit2
ITA 54/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Sri.P.T.Joy, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 269SSection 271D

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a trust registered under the provisions of the Act and run various educational institutions. During the assessment year 2012- 2013, the assessment was made without any additions to the income returned by the assessee. On going through the documents

AYYANTHOLE PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED 471,KARIYATTUKARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

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

ITA 198/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

198 & 209/COCH/2025\n Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19& 2020-21\nAyyanthole Panchayath Service Cooperative Bank Ltd.......................Appellant\nKariyattukara P.O.,\nKerala - 680611\n[PAN:AACAA3641G]\nITO, Ward-2(1), Thrissur..................................................................Respondent\nAppearances by:\nShri Alan P Dev, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee.\nSmt. Leena Lal, SNR AR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue.\nDate of concluding the hearing

AYYANTHOLE PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED 471,KARIYATTUKARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

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

ITA 209/COCH/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Aug 2025AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

198 & 209/COCH/2025\n Assessment Years: 2017-18, 2018-19& 2020-21\nAyyanthole Panchayath Service Cooperative Bank Ltd.......................Appellant\nKariyattukara P.O.,\nKerala - 680611\n[PAN:AACAA3641G]\nITO, Ward-2(1), Thrissur.\nvs.\n.Respondent\nAppearances by:\nShri Alan P Dev, Advocate, appeared on behalf of the assessee.\nSmt. Leena Lal, SNR AR, appeared on behalf of the Revenue.\nDate of concluding

AYYANTHOLE PANCHAYATH SERVICE COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED 471,KARIYATTUKARA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 2(1), THRISSUR

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

ITA 208/COCH/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(c)Section 80P(4)

delay in all three cases is condoned, and the appeals are admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. The core issue across all the appeals relates to the disallowance of deduction claimed under Section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961. We take ITA No.208/Coch/2025 as lead case for narration of facts. I.T.A. Nos.208, 198

V GUARD INDUSTRIES LIMITED,VENNALA vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, KOCHI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 63/COCH/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 Mar 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Sandeep Gosainv-Guard Industries Ltd. Principal Cit-1, 42/962, Vennala High School C R Building, I S Press Road, Vs. Road, Vennala, Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682028 [Pan: Aaacv5492Q] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Anil D. Nair, Advocate Respondent By: Shri Prashant V.K., Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing: 01.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 20.03.2023 O R D E R Per: Bench This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Challenging The Revision Of It’S Assessment Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ Hereinafter) Dated 28/12/2018 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2016-17 By The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Kochi (‘Pr. Cit’ For Short) Vide Order U/S. 263 Dated 22/03/2021. 2. The Appeal, Filed On 08/03/2022, Though Delayed By 256 Days, Was Admitted In View Of The Blanket Condonation By The Apex Court In Suo Motu Wp(C) No.3/2020, Dated 10/01/2022, Excluding The Period From 15/3/2020 To 28/02/2022 In Reckoning The Delay In Computing Limitation Under Law & The Hearing Accordingly Proceeded With. The Assessee Is A Company Manufacturing Electrical Cables, Pumps, Solar Water Heaters, Etc. & Trading In Electrical & Electronic Goods. Revision Of It’S Impugned Assessment Is On Several Issues On Which The Revisionary Authority Found An Absence Or Lack Of Enquiry By The Assessing Officer

For Appellant: Shri Anil D. Nair, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prashant V.K., CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

condonation by the Apex Court in Suo Motu WP(C) No.3/2020, dated 10/01/2022, excluding the period from 15/3/2020 to 28/02/2022 in reckoning the delay in computing limitation under law, and the hearing accordingly proceeded with. The assessee is a company manufacturing electrical cables, pumps, solar water heaters, etc., and trading in electrical and electronic goods. Revision of it’s impugned