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 245clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai115Karnataka104Chennai79Kolkata77Delhi55Bangalore37Pune31Jaipur27Surat22Ahmedabad15Hyderabad14Chandigarh13Cuttack11Visakhapatnam10Ranchi8Indore7Cochin6SC6Lucknow6Varanasi5Guwahati4Nagpur3Amritsar3Panaji2Agra1Dehradun1Calcutta1Andhra Pradesh1Patna1Raipur1Rajasthan1Allahabad1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 10B10Deduction5Section 2014Section 143(3)4Section 363Addition to Income3Section 194A2Section 402Section 195(6)

TRAVANCORE COCOTUFT P. LTD,ALAPPUZHA vs. THE ACIT, CIR-1,, ALAPPUZHA

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

ITA 199/COCH/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Jun 2019AY 2008-09

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

Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(3)Section 148

condone the delay of 03 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in confirming the exclusion of Rs.10,77,995/- from the export turnover, on the ground that the appellant had not received the sale proceeds within

M/S.PATHANMTHITTA DIST. CO-OP BANK LTD,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE DCIT, THIRUVALLA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as not maintainable and, in any case, without merit

2
TDS2
Exemption2
Disallowance2
ITA 431/COCH/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin12 Dec 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Daspathanamthitta District Dy. Cit, Circle- 1 Co-Op Bank Ltd. Thiruvalla Near Ksrtc Bus Stand Vs. Mylapara Road Pathanamthitta 689645 [Pan:Aabfp9182H] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Aswin Gopakumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)

condonation of delay despite it having been admitted. 4. The first issue on merits is the disallowance of provision for expenses, at Rs. 284.48 lacs, claimed by the assessee, a district co-operative bank registered under the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 (Kerala Act), through debit of it’s Profit and Loss Account (operating statement) for the year, being

SRI.PURUSOTHAMAN K.K.,PATHANAMTHITTA vs. THE ITO, WD-3, , THIRUVALLA

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

ITA 51/COCH/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin19 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

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

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

condone the delay of 79 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: A: The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, facts and circumstances of the case. B: The averments made before the first appellate

THE ITO,, ALAPPUZHA vs. M/S.EXTRAWEAVE P. LTD, ALAPPUZHA

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

ITA 448/COCH/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahum/S. Extraweave Pvt. Ltd. Arattukulangara Complex 264B/Cmc 1 Vs. A.N. Puram, Alapuzha 688011 Sakteeswara Junction Cherthala 688524 Pan – Aabce5438L Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R. Krishan, CAFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R
Section 10BSection 10B(3)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 195(6)Section 40

condoned delay and dismissed the SLP." 14.1 Further, the question whether dismissal of SLP amounts to laying down law in respect of the issue disputed under SLP, has been considered by the ITAT in the case of Moradabad Development Authority, 89 taxmann.com 263 and it was held as under: 7 M/s. Extraweave Pvt. Ltd. "4 ... …. Further, it is a settled

THE JTCIT(OSD), CALICUT vs. M/S. CHATHAMKULAM PROJECTS & DEVELOPERS P. LTD, PALAKKAD

In the result, both the appeal filed by Revenue as well as the Cross Objection

ITA 170/COCH/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153A

condone the delay of 17 days and admit the cross objection. The cross objection filed by the assessee is only supportive of the CIT(A) order. 2. The Revenue has raised the following grounds: 1) The ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,30,48,402/- made on account of unexplained net worth of the assessee

CANARA BANK,TRIVANDRUM vs. DCIT (TDS), TRIVANDRUM

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

ITA 474/COCH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin26 Sept 2019AY 2009-10

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

Section 194ASection 201

condone the short delay of 15 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The CIT(A) has erred in charging interest u/s. 201(1A) from the date on which tax was deductable and upto 31/03/2015 ignoring the contention of the appellant that Supreme Court