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.

36 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 119(2)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai269Mumbai244Delhi194Karnataka148Bangalore120Pune108Kolkata105Ahmedabad102Chandigarh101Hyderabad64Jaipur43Calcutta38Cuttack36Indore32Lucknow26Guwahati22Nagpur19Cochin18Rajkot17Visakhapatnam15Surat15Varanasi14Amritsar13Agra13Raipur10Jodhpur10Dehradun8SC7Jabalpur7Allahabad5Kerala4Panaji4Patna4Telangana4Ranchi1Punjab & Haryana1Orissa1Himachal Pradesh1Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 26380Section 11(2)24Section 1120Exemption20Section 143(3)18Section 119(2)(b)18Section 143(1)17Limitation/Time-bar17Section 12A15

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

ITA 436/CTK/2024[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

condone the delay in filing of Form 10 under section 119(2)(b) of the Act.” II. ITA No.437/CTK/2024; AY 2015-16: “Ground

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

Showing 1–20 of 36 · Page 1 of 2

Disallowance13
Deduction13
Condonation of Delay13
ITA 437/CTK/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

condone the delay in filing of Form 10 under section 119(2)(b) of the Act.” II. ITA No.437/CTK/2024; AY 2015-16: “Ground

JEEVAN KALYANA SADHANA KENDRA,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, SAMBALPUR

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

ITA 195/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack28 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250

condones the delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Act. The assessee had submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) by citing

NABA UTKAL TRUST,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 268/CTK/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Sept 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm & Shri Sanjay Awasthi, Am आयकर अपील सं/Ita No.268/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2021-2022) Naba Utkal Trust, Vs Ito, Exemption, Bhubaneswar Plot No.841, Keshab Complex, Cuttack Road, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar-751010 Pan No. : Aabtn 0126 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, Ca राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 28/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 02/09/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order, Dated 28.12.2024 Passed By The Ld. Addl./Jcit(A), Panaji, For The Assessment Year 2021-2022. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Barred By 60 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Therein That The Delay Of 60 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Is Due To Lack Of Knowledge About The Order Passed By The Ld.Pcit. Accordingly, The Assessee Prayed That The Delay Of 60 Days May Kindly Be Condoned & Appeal Of The Assessee May Kindly Be Admitted For Hearing. Ld. Sr. Dr Did Not Raise Any Objection To This Contention Of The Assessee For Condonation Of Delay. Accordingly, We Are Of The View That The Assessee

For Appellant: Shri Ambika Prasad Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR
Section 11(2)Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)

b) of the Ac in case of charitable or religious trusts or institution in Form 10B(Rules 17B) was filed and uploaded on 16th March, 2021, however, the due date of which was 15.03.2021 and the return of income under the provisions was also filed and uploaded on 16.03.2021. During the year the gross total income of the assessee

M/S. NALCO MINES EMPLOYEES UNION,KORAPUT vs. PR.CIT-1, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is disposed off with the directions to the competent authority –ld

ITA 26/CTK/2021[12-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021

Bench: S/Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Manish Boradassessment Years: 2012-13 To 2017-18 Shri Pramod Kumar Moharana, Vs. Pr. Cit-1, Bhubaneswar.Of Nalco Mines Employees‟ Union, At: D-9, Sector-1, Nalco Township, Damanjodi,Dist: Koraput Pan/Gir No.Aclpm 0589 M (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Basudev Panda, Sr. Advocate Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 27 /10/ 2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order U/S.119(2)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Of The Pr. Cit(A)-1, Bhubaneswar For The Assessment Years 2012-13 To 2017-18. Application Of Applicant/Assessee For Condonation Of Delay :- 2. Ld. Senior Counsel On Application Dated 28.03.2021 Submitted That The Hon‟Ble High Court Of Orissa Was Pleased To Direct To File Appeal Before The Tribunal For Adjudication & The Matter Was Disposed Of Vide W.P.(C) No.24445/2020, Dated 05.01.2021 & I.A.No.250/2021 Vide Dated 17.03.2021 For Consideration Of Explanation Of Assessee For The Delay In P A G E 1 | 20 Assessment Years: 2012-13 To 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Basudev Panda, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 119(2)(b)

119 2(b) and order of the Hon'ble High Court dated 31.07.2019 list of assesses along with order of this Hon'ble Bench dated 20.01.2012 are separately furnished and filed for consideration and for grant of refund. P a g e 3 | 20 Assessment Years: 2012-13 to 2017-18 G. For that once the Hon'ble High Court

WOMEN ORGANISATION FOR SOCIO CULTURAL AWARNESS,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,EXEMPTIONS, CUTTACK

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

ITA 67/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 250

section 119(2)(b) of the IT Act to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad for condonation of the delay

PRASANNMANI COLLEGE OF PHYSICAL EDUCATION &YOGA,TIGIRIA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), CUTTACK

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 46/CTK/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2017-18 Prasannamani Prasannamani College College Of Of Vs. Ito (Exemption) Ito (Exemption) Physical Education & Yoga, Physical Education & Yoga, Cuttack At/Po: Tigiria, Dist: Cuttack At/Po: Tigiria, Dist: Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aacap 1478 J (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Sarangi, Ar S.K.Sarangi, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 1/9 9/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 1/9 9/2022

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, SR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(3)

condone the delay. This power has been granted to the ld CIT(E) under the provision of section 119(2)(b

INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 509/CTK/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Income Tax Officer, Exemption Indira Gandhi Institute Of Ward, Bhubaneswar, Pharmaceutical Sciences Pratyaksha Kar Bhawan, Third N-4/208 Nayapalli, Irc Village, Floor, Regional Telecom Trg Vs. Khorda, Odisha-751015 Centre, Vss Nagar Road, Bhubaneswar-751007 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaati7724B Assessee By : Shri Kc Jena, Ar Revenue By : Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri KC Jena, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kumar Chakraborty
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

delay in filing of the audit report". He, therefore, pleaded to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities. 6. On the other hand, Id. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee ought to have filed the condonation petition before the revenue authorities under section 119(2)(b

OORISSA EVANGELIST TRUST ASSOCIATION,CUTTACK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, CUTTACK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 199/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Orissa Evangelistic Trust Ito, Exemption Ward, Cuttack Association, Aaykar Bhavan, Shelter Chhak At-Kesharpur, Buxi Bazar, Tulsipur, Cuttack, Vs. Cuttack-753001 Odisha-753008 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaato0708P Assessee By : Shri Sk Sarangi, Ar Revenue By : Shri Nishanth Rao B, Dr Date Of Hearing: 16.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 16.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri SK Sarangi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Nishanth Rao B, DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 143(1)

delay in filing of the audit report". He, therefore, pleaded to set aside the orders passed by the lower authorities. 6. On the other hand, Id. Departmental Representative submits that the assessee ought to have filed the condonation petition before the revenue authorities under section 119(2)(b

STATE INSTITUTE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF ARTS AND CRAFTS,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 63/CTK/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Girish Agrawalwalassessment Year : 2016-17 State State Institute Institute For For Vs. Cit (Exemptions) Cit (Exemptions) Development Of Arts & Development Of Arts & Bhubaneswar Bhubaneswar Crafts, Handicarft Complex, Crafts, Handicarft Complex, Gandamunda, Bhubaneswar. Gandamunda, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaets 9430 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nihar Ranjan Biswal, Ca Nihar Ranjan Biswal, Ca Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 21/07 7/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/0 /07/2023 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Nihar Ranjan Biswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr
Section 119(2)(b)

condone the delay in filing Form 10B and set aside the order of the CIT(E).” 4. A perusal of the order of the ld CIT(E) shows that the order has been passed against the application for approval u/s.119(2)(b) of the I.T.Act, 1961. We observe that such type of order passed under section 119

STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ODISHA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ITO, WARAD 5(2), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed and stay petition stands dismissed

ITA 301/CTK/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwals.P.No.11/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year :2017-18 State Pollution Control Board State Pollution Control Board, Vs. Ito, Ward 5(2), Plot No.A-118, Paribesh Bhawan, 118, Paribesh Bhawan, Bhubaneswar Nilakantha Nagar, Agar, Nayapali, Nayapali, Unit-Vii, Bhubaneswar Neswar Pan/Gir No.Aaals 2490 J Aaals 2490 J (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.K.Agrawalla, Ca Walla, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit Sanjay Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/10/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 24/10/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Agrawalla, CA walla, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT
Section 4

condonation of delay for not filing of its return of income within the statutory time limit, before the CBDT u/s 119(2)(b) of Income Tax Act, which has expressed provision for admission of claim of any exemption after the expiry of the period specified in the Income Tax Act. 2.4.2 In view of the above, it is humbly submitted

M/S. KALINGA INSTITUTE OF TRAINING FOR SECURITY & CONSULTANCY SERVICES,BALASORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, BALASORE

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 436/CTK/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Dec 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

119 (Kerala) and DCIT, Circle-12, Kolkata Vs. Bengal Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2011) 10 taxmann.com 26 (Kolkata), confirmed the order of AO. 5. Ld.AR of the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. AIMIL Limited [2010] 321 ITR 508 (DEL), wherein it was held that the employees’ contribution towards

M/S. KALINGA INSTITUTE OF TRAINING FOR SECURITY & CONSULTANCY SERVICES,BALASORE vs. ITO, WARD-1, BALASORE

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 435/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack28 Dec 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Pradhan, DR
Section 139(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

119 (Kerala) and DCIT, Circle-12, Kolkata Vs. Bengal Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2011) 10 taxmann.com 26 (Kolkata), confirmed the order of AO. 5. Ld.AR of the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. AIMIL Limited [2010] 321 ITR 508 (DEL), wherein it was held that the employees’ contribution towards

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 208/CTK/2024[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2024AY 2003-04
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 260Section 263

delay should be condoned. 5. Consequent upon the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and after due consideration of the submission of the assessee, the total income of the assessee was computed as Rs.Nil after allowing the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for all the subject assessment years. Copy of the order dated

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 209/CTK/2024[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2024AY 2004-05
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 260Section 263

delay should be condoned. 5. Consequent upon the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and after due consideration of the submission of the assessee, the total income of the assessee was computed as Rs.Nil after allowing the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for all the subject assessment years. Copy of the order dated

PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE1(1), CUTTACK

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 210/CTK/2024[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack25 Sept 2024AY 2005-06
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 12ASection 260Section 263

delay should be condoned. 5. Consequent upon the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Orissa and after due consideration of the submission of the assessee, the total income of the assessee was computed as Rs.Nil after allowing the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Act for all the subject assessment years. Copy of the order dated

INDIRA GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,SARANGA vs. ITO,EXEMPTION,BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 375/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalassessment Year : 2015-16 Indira Gandhi Institute Of Indira Gandhi Institute Of Vs. Ito, Ito, Exemption, Exemption, Technology, Technology, Saranga, Saranga, Bhubaneswar. Kamakhya Kamakhya Nagar, Nagar, Dist: Dhenkanal-759146 759146 Pan/Gir No. No.Aaati 5050 J (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Natabar Panda, Adv Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 30/01/20 2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 30/01/20 025 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Natabar Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 10Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 197A

section 148 could have been deemed to be a return u/s.139(1) of the Act. It was also the submission that the assesse has filed a petition before the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) u/s 119(2)(b) for condoning the delay

INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND INFORMATION SCIENCE,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 260/CTK/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Rajesh Kumarita Nos.259 To 262/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2017-18 To 2020 18 To 2020-2021 Institute Of Management & Institute Of Management & Vs. Cit (Exemptions), Cit (Exemptions), Information Information Science, Science, Swagat Swagat Hyderabad Vihar, Bankuala, Bhubaneswar Vihar, Bankuala, Bhubaneswar- 751 002 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaati 2941 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr
Section 119Section 119(2)(b)

condonation of delay. As there was no sufficient reason which prevented the assessee from filing the same within the due date, the ld CIT(E) rejected the applications and dismissed the appeals. Against the rejection of appeals by the ld CIT(E), the assessee has filed appeals before the Tribunal. 5. We observe that no appeal against the order passed

INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND INFORMATION SCIENCE,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT EXEMPTION, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 262/CTK/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Rajesh Kumarita Nos.259 To 262/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2017-18 To 2020 18 To 2020-2021 Institute Of Management & Institute Of Management & Vs. Cit (Exemptions), Cit (Exemptions), Information Information Science, Science, Swagat Swagat Hyderabad Vihar, Bankuala, Bhubaneswar Vihar, Bankuala, Bhubaneswar- 751 002 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaati 2941 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr
Section 119Section 119(2)(b)

condonation of delay. As there was no sufficient reason which prevented the assessee from filing the same within the due date, the ld CIT(E) rejected the applications and dismissed the appeals. Against the rejection of appeals by the ld CIT(E), the assessee has filed appeals before the Tribunal. 5. We observe that no appeal against the order passed

INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND INFORMATION SCIENCE,BHUBANESWAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeals filed by the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 259/CTK/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack09 Oct 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Rajesh Kumarita Nos.259 To 262/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Year Assessment Years : 2017-18 To 2020 18 To 2020-2021 Institute Of Management & Institute Of Management & Vs. Cit (Exemptions), Cit (Exemptions), Information Information Science, Science, Swagat Swagat Hyderabad Vihar, Bankuala, Bhubaneswar Vihar, Bankuala, Bhubaneswar- 751 002 Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aaati 2941 Q (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. : Shri Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Charan Dass, Sr
Section 119Section 119(2)(b)

condonation of delay. As there was no sufficient reason which prevented the assessee from filing the same within the due date, the ld CIT(E) rejected the applications and dismissed the appeals. Against the rejection of appeals by the ld CIT(E), the assessee has filed appeals before the Tribunal. 5. We observe that no appeal against the order passed