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.

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 36(1)(viia)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai62Chennai59Chandigarh55Kolkata15Cochin4Jaipur4Delhi4Bangalore4Cuttack3Agra2Hyderabad2Nagpur2Pune2SC1Patna1Visakhapatnam1Lucknow1Indore1

Key Topics

Section 80P10Section 566Deduction3Section 2502Section 80P(4)2Section 80P(2)2Section 22Section 222Section 143(3)2

KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISES LIMITED,THRISSUR vs. DCIT CIRCLE 1(1) & TPS, THRISSUR

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 933/COCH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin16 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Manomohan Daskerala State Financial Dy. Cit, Circle - 1(1) & Tps Enterprises Ltd. Thrissur Bhadratha, Museum Road Vs. Chembukkavu - 680020 Thrissur [Pan:Aabct3817A] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Harikrishnanunny, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(vii)

delay attending its filing. The restoration thereto for considering the same, challenged on the ground of the appeal having been already decided, did not find acceptance by the Hon’ble Apex Court, explaining that an order dismissing an appeal as barred by time is also an order disposing the appeal, since admitted, passed in exercise of the appellate power

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

Limitation/Time-bar2

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

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

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

ITA 36/COCH/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Aruj Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 2Section 22Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(4)

section 80P deduction claim in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify all necessary facts, in consequential computation as per law. Ordered accordingly. 7. Our attention is next invited to the learned lower authorities action making sec.40(a)(ia) read with Rule 194C and sec.36(i)(viia) disallowance(s) assessment year-wise, respectively. There would

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

ITA 37/COCH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Sept 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Aruj Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Section 2Section 22Section 250Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(4)

section 80P deduction claim in principle and leave it open for the learned Assessing Officer to verify all necessary facts, in consequential computation as per law. Ordered accordingly. 7. Our attention is next invited to the learned lower authorities action making sec.40(a)(ia) read with Rule 194C and sec.36(i)(viia) disallowance(s) assessment year-wise, respectively. There would