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.

9 results for “condonation of delay”+ Short Term Capital Gainsclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai416Chennai341Kolkata217Delhi153Ahmedabad145Hyderabad123Jaipur118Bangalore112Karnataka103Chandigarh85Pune70Surat50Calcutta46Nagpur35Panaji35Indore30Visakhapatnam24Lucknow24Raipur22Rajkot19Agra13Cuttack11Ranchi9Cochin9SC9Amritsar7Jodhpur6Patna6Guwahati6Jabalpur5Varanasi5Dehradun3Allahabad3Telangana2Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 1486Capital Gains5Section 2504Section 270A4Section 139(1)4Section 271(1)(c)4Addition to Income4Short Term Capital Gains4Section 147

LALY CHIRAKANDATHIL GEORGE,KOCHI vs. THE ACIT, KOCHI

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

ITA 73/COCH/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin05 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Laly Chirakandathil George The Acit Corp. Circle 1(2) Kattarukudiyil, Rmv Road, Kochi Vs. Elamakara, Kochi-26

For Appellant: Shri Mathew JosephFor Respondent: Smt. J M Jamuna Devi
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 74(1)(a)

short term capital loss against the LTCG thereby determining the total income at Rs.29,18,400/-. 4. The assessee was in appeal before the first appellate authority on 11.03.2019, challenging the impugned intimation. 5. The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 23.12.2021 had dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for the reason that there has been a delay

3
Section 143(1)3
Section 1443
Long Term Capital Gains3

PALAKKAL KRISHNANKUTTY RAGHAVAN,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURUVAYOOR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 741/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: None
Section 144Section 148Section 270ASection 69A

short term capital gains. Subsequently, the AO also proposed to impose penalty u/s. 270A of the Act for which also the assessee had not filed their objections except the reply stating that he is about to file an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The AO confirmed the penalty since the period for filing the appeal was over and no plausible

PALAKKAL KRISHNANKUTTY RAGHAVAN,THRISSUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURUVAYOOR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 740/COCH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin27 Feb 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: None
Section 144Section 148Section 270ASection 69A

short term capital gains. Subsequently, the AO also proposed to impose penalty u/s. 270A of the Act for which also the assessee had not filed their objections except the reply stating that he is about to file an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The AO confirmed the penalty since the period for filing the appeal was over and no plausible

SONIYA DAVID LATHIKA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO WARD 2(3), TRIVANDRUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 667/COCH/2022[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin07 Jun 2024AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Soniya David Lathika The Ito, Ward-2(3) S. S. Nivas, Vizhinjam, Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar, Vs. Mukkola, Venganoor, Trivandrum-4 Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala Pan/Gir No. Ajqpl 8228 A (Assessee) : (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Adarsh BFor Respondent: 13.03.2024
Section 10(37)Section 250

short) had filed belatedly. As the appeal per se was filed on time, we deem it fit to condone the delay of 45 days in filing the physical documents. Delay condoned. 3. The assessee had filed the following grounds of appeal: 2 Soniya David Lathika vs. ITO 1. The order of the learned Assessing officer is against law, facts

CHRISTUDANAM YASSAYA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

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

ITA 840/COCH/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin10 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2011-12 Christudanam Yassaya .......... Appellant Bathel Kp 17A Maruthoor, Vattapara P.O. Thiruvananthapuram 695028 [Pan: Acmpy4412C] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1) .......... Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Kowdiar Thiruvananthapuram 695003

For Appellant: ------- None -------For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 139(1)Section 142Section 144Section 148Section 264Section 271Section 271(1)(c)

short term capital gain on sale of property at Rs. 32,42,980/-. On the above addition the AO initiated penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. This assessment order was passed u/s. 144 r.w.s. 264 on 29.11.2019 at a total income of Rs. 38,32,110/-. 3. The appellant, in response to the show cause notice

SAHEED PALKKANDY KOTTOTH,KANNUR vs. DCIT INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, KOCHI

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 107/COCH/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 Oct 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singhsaheed Palkkandy Kottoth Dcit (International Taxation) Safa Kottoth, Paral Kochi Vs. Thalassery, Kannur 670671 [Pan: Akhpp4843M] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: ------- Noe -------For Respondent: Dr. S. Pandian, CIT-DR
Section 250Section 50D

Delay of 205 days in filing the instant appeal is condoned as per assessee’s solemn averments in light of Collector, Land Acquisition vs., MST Katiji [1987] 167 ITR 471 (SC) having settled the law long back that all such technical aspects must make a way for the cause of substantial justice. 2 Saheed Palkkandy Kottoth 3. It emerges during

DCIT, TRIVANDRUM vs. BRAHMOS AEROSPACE( THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the appeal filedby

ITA 742/COCH/2019[2002-03]Status: HeardITAT Cochin23 Feb 2022AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am Deputy Commissioner Brahmos Aerospace Of Income Tax, (Thiruvananthapuram) Ltd., Circle-1(1), V. Chackai, Thiruvananthapuram Beach Post, Kerala Tiruvananthapuram, Kerala Pan – Aabck2217K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Abraham Joseph Markos, Adv
Section 139(1)Section 139(3)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 80

capital gains, and it claims to carry forwards and set off such loss under Section 72(1), 73(2), 74(1), 74(3) or 74A(3), it is required to file its return of income within the prescribed time u/s 139(1) of the 1961 Act which return of income is to be in the prescribed form and verified

JANARDHANAN NAMBOODIRI MUTHATHI ELLAM,KANNUR vs. ITO WARD 3, KANNUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA

ITA 687/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm Assessment Year: 2018-19 Janardhanan Namboodiri .......... Appellant Muthathi Ellam, Korrom P.O., Payannur Kannur 670370 [Pan: Aampe6755E] Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3, Kannur ......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Arun Raj, Advocate Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 29.10.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.10.2025

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 147Section 250

short, ‘Ld. AO’) order passed under section 147 of the Act, date of order 29/03/2023. 2 Janardhanan Namboodiri 2. The Registry has reported that the present appeal has been filed with a delay of 182 days. The assessee has moved a petition for condonation of delay accompanied by an affidavit dated 23.09.2025, which is placed in record. In the said

JOHN GEORGE,ERNAKULAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), KOCHI

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

ITA 766/COCH/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin25 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm Assessment Year: 2018-19 John George, .......... Appellant Apt No.11A Infra Foreshore, Ifp Road, Fine Arts Avenue, Ernakulam, Kerala- 682 016. Vs. [Pan: Adlpg1701A]

For Appellant: Mr.Gopalakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 147

short] dated 22.08.2025 for Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) passed order u/s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) dated 22.08.2023 making variation in respect of Long term Capital Gain and variation in respect of issue of set off of losses disallowed. Aggrieved