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 156clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai195Delhi194Mumbai173Pune151Karnataka104Ahmedabad81Bangalore75Kolkata64Jaipur60Hyderabad44Panaji43Cochin36Calcutta35Surat28Chandigarh27Indore22Kerala17Raipur14Nagpur11Amritsar11Visakhapatnam10Rajkot10Varanasi8Jodhpur7Allahabad7Patna7Lucknow6SC6Cuttack6Jabalpur4Agra3Andhra Pradesh1Guwahati1Telangana1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 143(2)9Section 12A9Section 2(15)3Condonation of Delay3Section 1472Section 112Section 772Section 133(6)2Limitation/Time-bar

TAPAN KUMAR SETHY,CUTTACK vs. ITO, WARD-2(4), CUTTACK

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

ITA 227/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: S/Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Rajesh Kumarassessment Year : 2017-18 Tapan Kumar Sethy Vs. Ito, Ward-2(4), Purighat Road, Telenga Bazar , Cuttack Cuttack- 753009 Pan/Gir No. Blzps 1048 F (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sudhanshu Kr Das, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 02 /07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 02 /07/2025 O R D E R Per Bench The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nafc), New Delhi Nfac), Delhi Dated 15/06/2022 In Appeal No.Cit(A), Cuttack/10917/2019-20 Passed For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Appeal Is Time Barred By 952 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Petition Dated 7.4.2025 Supported With Affidavit Stating The Reasons That Due To Serious Illness Of The Assessee’S Mother & Change Of P A G E 1 | 5 Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Sudhanshu Kr Das, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prateek Kr Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 253(3)

156 taxmann.com 361 (Madras) wherein it is held that where assessee had not given 'sufficient cause' for condoning huge delay in filing appeal, therefore, the delay could not be condoned. 4. We have considered the rival submissions and also the condonation petition filed by the assessee. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has right to appeal against

2

M/S. BARIPADA URBAN COOPERATIVE BANK LTD.,BARIPADA vs. ACIT, BALASORE CIRCLE, BALASORE., BALASORE

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

ITA 532/CTK/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2009-2010 Baripada Urban Co-Operative Vs. Acit, Balasore Circle, Bank Ltd., At: Roxy Road, Balasore. Baripada Pan/Gir No. Aabat 2673 C (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri B.Panda/B.R.Panda, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

condone the delay of 179 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. The assessee has filed additional grounds of appeal on 4.1.2016: ”1. For that notice u/s.143(2), neither was issued nor served on the appellant which is required in the statute and in absence of such notice, assessment made and orders

BHUBANESWAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,BHUBANESWAR vs. CIT, BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 329/CTK/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2017

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadalebhubaneswar Development Vs. Cit, Bhubaneswar. Authority, Akash Shova Building, Sachivalaya Marg, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Aaalb 0073 G (Appellant) .. ( Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.Naik/R.K.Kar, ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K.Mohapatra, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 77

condonation of delay. On this ground, the petition of the assessee is also being rejected for the same is beyond the purview of the I.T. Act, 1961. 3. Vide the same petition dt. 06.12.2012, the applicant cited the objects as envisaged u/s 77 of the ODA Act, 1982 and also a brief account of its activities so far conducted

DCIT,CIRCLE1(1), CUTTACK vs. M/S. SATYAM CASTING (P) LIMITED, GOPALPUR

ITA 28/CTK/2021[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack28 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Vs M/S. Satyam Casting Pvt M/S. Satyam Casting Pvt Aayakar Aayakar Bhavan, Bhavan, Shelter Shelter Ltd., At./Po: Plot No.A Ltd., At./Po: Plot No.A-2, Square, Cuttack Square, Cuttack Choudwar, Industrial Estate, Choudwar, Industrial Estate, Gopalpur, Cuttack Gopalpur, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aafcs 1536 H (Appellant) ) .. ( Respondent Respondent) C.O.No.19/Ctk/2021 (In Ita No.28/Ctk/2021): A.Y. 2016 No.28/Ctk/2021): A.Y. 2016-17 M/S. Satyam Casting Pvt M/S. Satyam Casting Pvt Vs Dcit, Circle Dcit, Circle-1(1), Ltd., At./Po: Plot No.A Ltd., At./Po: Plot No.A-2, Aayakar Aayakar Bhavan, Bhavan, Shelter Shelter Choudwar, Industrial Estate, Choudwar, Industrial Estate, Square, Cuttack Square, Cuttack Gopalpur, Cuttack Gopalpur, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aafcs 1536 H (Cross Objector) Cross Objector) .. ( Appellant) Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT
Section 133(6)

condone the delay of 111 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. In revenue’s appeal, ld CIT DR submitted that the assessee is a company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing of steel. It was the submission that the total sales of the assessee during the year was Rs.31.17 crores and the income from Derivatives

M/S. MAHASAKTI FOUNDATION,KALAHANDI vs. ACIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 134/CTK/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Jun 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Kunal Singh, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 40

condonation of delay in seeking registration was not available. This clearly goes to prove that the first proviso to section 12A(2) was brought in the statute only as a retrospective effect with a view not to affect genuine charitable trusts and societies carrying on genuine charitable objects in the earlier years and substantive conditions stipulated in section

BALADEB MOHAPATRA,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, PARADEEP

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 344/CTK/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack30 Jul 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita No.344/Ctk/2016 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2011-2012) Shri Baladeb Mohapatra, Vs. Ito, Ward-1, Paradeep Pahana, Pankapal, Jagatsinghpur Pan No. : Akhpm 1731 F (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Sunil Mishra, Advocate िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri J.K.Lenka,Dr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 17/07/2020 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 31/07/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, Am: The Assessee Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Cuttack, Dated 20.06.2016 For The A.Y.2011-2012. 2. This Appeal Was Already Disposed Off By This Tribunal Vide Order Dated 31.08.2017. Thereafter The Assessee Preferred An Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Jurisdictional High Court, Which Was Registered As Income Tax Appeal No.51/2017 & The Hon’Ble High Court Vide Order Dated 06.02.2019 Has Directed The Tribunal To Decide The Review Petition To Be Filed By The Assessee As Expeditiously As Possible, Preferably Within A Period Of Four Months From The Date Of Filing Of Such Review Petition. Accordingly, The Assessee Filed A Miscellaneous Application Before The Tribunal & The Tribunal Accepting The Contention Of The Assessee & 2 With A Compliance To The Order Of The Hon’Ble High Court, Stated Supra

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri J.K.Lenka,DR

condonation of delay while considering the review by the Tribunal. 6. Original copy of the impugned order may be returned to the appellant substituting attested photocopies thereof. 7. With the above observation/direction, the appeal stands disposed of. All connected Misc. Cases/I.As. are disposed of accordingly. Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application