Search: condonation of delay | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,406 Delhi2,131 Chennai2,062 Kolkata1,286 Pune1,213 Ahmedabad1,177 Bangalore907 Hyderabad815 Jaipur788 Patna743 Surat511 Chandigarh508 Indore473 Nagpur400 Raipur393 Cochin356 Lucknow345 Visakhapatnam338 Rajkot323 Amritsar250 Cuttack210 Agra162 Panaji139 Dehradun95 Guwahati88 Jodhpur80 Jabalpur75 SC73 Allahabad62 Ranchi61 Varanasi21 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1 R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1 VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1

Key Topics

Section 80P79 Section 234E49 Section 143(3)40 Deduction40 Section 25036 Condonation of Delay35 Addition to Income30 Section 80P(2)(a)24 Limitation/Time-bar

M/S. PARAVUR SERVICE CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KOLLAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2, KOLLAM

In the result, the appeal and stay petition filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 767/COCH/2023[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin08 Jul 2024

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Santosh P. Abraham, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, D.R

Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

Section 253(3) of I.T. Act, leading us unhesitatingly to reject assessee’s request for condonation of delay in filing

M/S KADIRUR SERVICE CO-OP BANK LTD,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 2, KANNUR

Showing 1–20 of 356 · Page 1 of 18

...

24

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 104/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Kadirur Service Co- Operative Bank Ltd., The Income Tax Kadirur, Officer, Thalassery, Ward – 2, Kannur, Kannur. Kerala – 670 642. Vs. Pan: Aaffk6859E Appellant Respondent : Shri Arun Raj .S, Assessee By Advocate Revenue By : Shri Ilayaraja K.S, Sr. Dr

For Respondent: Shri Arun Raj .S

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 51Section 80p

3) 'Every day's delay must be explained' does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational, commonsense and pragmatic manner. (4) When substantial justice and technical consideration are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 761/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

3 SCC 563, this Court, while dismissing the application for condonation of delay of 427 days in filing the Special Leave Petition, held that condonation of delay is not an exception and it should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the government departments. In that case, this Court held that unless the Department has reasonable and acceptable reason

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO, WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 764/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

3 SCC 563, this Court, while dismissing the application for condonation of delay of 427 days in filing the Special Leave Petition, held that condonation of delay is not an exception and it should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the government departments. In that case, this Court held that unless the Department has reasonable and acceptable reason

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO ,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 762/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

3 SCC 563, this Court, while dismissing the application for condonation of delay of 427 days in filing the Special Leave Petition, held that condonation of delay is not an exception and it should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the government departments. In that case, this Court held that unless the Department has reasonable and acceptable reason

PRIMARY HEALTH CENTRE KUNNAMANAGALAM KOZHIKODE,KOZHIKODE vs. ITO,WARD TDS, KOZHIKODE

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 763/COCH/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Richard Mathews, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

3 SCC 563, this Court, while dismissing the application for condonation of delay of 427 days in filing the Special Leave Petition, held that condonation of delay is not an exception and it should not be used as an anticipated benefit for the government departments. In that case, this Court held that unless the Department has reasonable and acceptable reason

CELESTIAL INFRASTRUCTURE PVT LTD,AMBALAMUGAL vs. DCIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-1(1), ERNALUAM

In the result, appeal is "Dismissed"

ITA 160/COCH/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhcelestial Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Dcit, Corporate Circle - 1(1) Aiswarya Towers Cr Building, Is Press Road Hoc Junction, Ambalamugal Vs. Kochi 682018 Ernakulam 682302 [Pan: Aaccc6737F] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Thomas Thomas, CAFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 249Section 249(3)Section 250

condone the delay in filing the appeal and to decide the appeal on merits. Signed Appellant 7.5 As per Section 249(3

SHOBHA RAMAKRISHNANA NAIR,ERNAKULAM vs. ITO, WARD 2, ALUVA

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

ITA 810/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin02 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2016-17 Shobha Ramakrishnan Nair Karthika Sebipuram Ito Ernakulam Ward-2 Vs. Manjapra So Aluva Kerala 683581 Pan No :Awrpr5406L Appellant Respondent Appellant By : None Respondent By : Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 30.01.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02.04.2025 O R D E R Per Keshav Dubey: This Appeal At The Instance Of The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac Dated 22.12.2023 Vide Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1059003947(1) For The Ay 2016- 17 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R

section 143 (3) of the Act on 15-11-2019, by the Income-tax officer, Ward 3 , Aluva, on a total income of Rs. 3,15,580/-, accepting the income returned, which included commission from sale of stamps. 8.1 Further, the assessee stated that the ld. CIT(A)/NFAC grossly erred in not condoning the delay

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 994/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 993/COCH/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 984/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 991/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 992/COCH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 986/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 985/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 987/COCH/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 988/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 989/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

COMMISSIONER FOR GOVT EXAMINATIONS ,POOJAPPURA vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(2), TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the assessee’s appeals are dismissed

ITA 990/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin15 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Das

For Appellant: ----- None -----For Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 192Section 200Section 206CSection 234E

3. The appeals, filed on 06.12.2022, are with a delay of 38 days. The Affidavit dated 19.11.2022 by Shri Santosh Kumar S., Secretary to the assessee, a government institution, who has also verified the appeal memo, filed along with, explains the delay in terms of the Tax Consultants – without naming them, being pre-occupied ITA Nos. 984 to 994/Coch/2022

SAYEGH PAINT FACTORIES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,ERNAKULAM vs. CORPORATE CIR 2(1), KOCHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the stay petition is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 451/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin30 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Snr.AR

Section 144B(6)(vii)Section 148Section 271BSection 273BSection 44A

3 of 7 S.A. No. 69/Coch/2025 & Subsequent compliance and condonation 5- A condonation petition was filed before the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (PCIT), Ernalculam on 01.10.2021. The delay was condoned vide order dated 19.05.2023. However, prior to this, the case was taken up for scrutiny under Section