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.

27 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 221(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai184Karnataka105Delhi77Mumbai52Hyderabad42Kolkata35Bangalore32Jaipur29Pune29Cochin27Ahmedabad17Lucknow16Surat14Chandigarh12Cuttack9Guwahati7Indore7Raipur6Amritsar4Allahabad4Visakhapatnam3Rajkot3Agra3SC2Calcutta1Rajasthan1Telangana1Andhra Pradesh1Jodhpur1Dehradun1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 234E40Section 200A20TDS20Section 271B12Section 80I9Section 407Section 686Deduction6Section 2635Section 44A

SRI.P. GOPALAKRISHNAN ALIAS DILEEP,ALUVA vs. THE ACIT, ALUVA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 164/COCH/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin01 Aug 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & George George K., Jm

Section 139Section 201Section 40

condone the short delay of 10 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised various grounds of appeal. However, the assessee has pressed only one ground No. 4(d) relating to the applicability of second proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 4. The facts relating to this issue

ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S SKYLINE BUILDERS, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 927/COCH/2024[2009-10]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

3
Cash Deposit2
Penalty2
ITAT Cochin
26 May 2025
AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.P.M.Veeramani, CA
Section 801B(10)Section 80I

condone the delay of 47 days and proceed to decide these appeals by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 4. The brief facts of the case as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business of builder and developer in Ernakulam District

ACIT, KOCHI vs. M/S SKYLINE BUILDERS, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 942/COCH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.P.M.Veeramani, CA
Section 801B(10)Section 80I

condone the delay of 47 days and proceed to decide these appeals by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 4. The brief facts of the case as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business of builder and developer in Ernakulam District

ACIT, ERNAKULAM vs. M/S SKYLINE BUILDERS, ERNAKULAM

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

ITA 928/COCH/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 May 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Sri.Sundarasan S, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Sri.P.M.Veeramani, CA
Section 801B(10)Section 80I

condone the delay of 47 days and proceed to decide these appeals by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 4. The brief facts of the case as coming out from the orders of the authorities below are that the assessee is a partnership firm carrying on the business of builder and developer in Ernakulam District

KALLUMALA AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD NO HW 14,ALAPPUZHA vs. ITO, WARD 2, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 119/COCH/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Sabu C S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 275Section 44ASection 80P

221/-. While the matter stood thus, the AO also issued a show cause notice U/s. 275 r.w.s 271B of the Act on 29/03/2022 calling upon the appellant to show cause as to why an order imposing penalty U/s. 271B of the Act cannot be passed. In response to the show cause notice, the appellant has filed a detailed explanation which

KALLUMALA AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE BANK LTD NO HW 14,ALAPPUZHA vs. ITO, WARD 2, THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 118/COCH/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sabu C S, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 275Section 44ASection 80P

221/-. While the matter stood thus, the AO also issued a show cause notice U/s. 275 r.w.s 271B of the Act on 29/03/2022 calling upon the appellant to show cause as to why an order imposing penalty U/s. 271B of the Act cannot be passed. In response to the show cause notice, the appellant has filed a detailed explanation which

SUPRIYA ENTERPRISES,MANJERI, MALAPPURAM vs. THE ITO, TIRUR

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 301/COCH/2020[2015-16 ]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Dec 2022

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalm/S. Supriya Enterprises Principal Commissioner Of 16,263, Calicut Road Income Tax Vs. Manjeri, Malappuram 676121 Kozhikode

For Appellant: Shri Shaji Poulose, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 44ASection 68

1. The assessee filed the Return of Income for A.Y 2015-16 on 24-03-2017 admitting a total income of Rs. 2,85,940/-. The case was selected for scrutiny assessment by CASS under limited category for verifying whether the cash in hand· shown in Return of income is correct. Subsequently the notice u/s 143(2) was issued

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 226/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

THE ITO, KANNUR vs. JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 230/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 222/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 238/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 231/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

THE ITO, KANNUR vs. JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOZHIKODE

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 235/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 232/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 236/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 224/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 221/COCH/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 229/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 237/COCH/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B

JIPSI TOOLS ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOZHIKODE vs. THE ITO, KANNUR

In the result, the delay in filing of the appeals before the CIT(A) is condoned and the issues in the appeals are restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merit

ITA 233/COCH/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am

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

Section 234E of the Act for all the relevant assessment years. Against the levy the assessee had filed appeals before the learned CIT(A) belatedly. On account of the delay in filing of the appeal the learned CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi had dismissed assessee’s appeal. It was submitted that these appeals pertain to the intimation u/s 200A/206B