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.

19 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 272A(2)(e)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi158Chennai86Pune74Mumbai45Bangalore44Visakhapatnam37Ahmedabad28Cochin28Lucknow26Surat25Karnataka21Cuttack19Kolkata15Hyderabad14Indore14Allahabad11Jaipur9Chandigarh9Rajkot9Amritsar7Nagpur4Patna4Agra3Jabalpur3Raipur3SC2Ranchi1Guwahati1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Penalty19Section 14716Section 272A(1)(d)16Section 14416Condonation of Delay11Section 270A8Section 271D8Section 1488Section 271(1)(c)

SHISHU ANANTA MAHAVIDYALAYA,KHURDA vs. JCIT(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 203/CTK/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Aug 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.201 To 203/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Shishu Ananta Mahavidyalaya, Vs. Jcit(Tds), Bhubaneswar Balipatana, Khurda-752102 Tan No. : Bbns00799 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 226(3)Section 272ASection 272A(2)(K)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

condoned, and the case may kindly be heard. 2. For That the order of penalty U/s 272A(2)(k) passed by the learned Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Bhubaneswar as well as the appeal order passed by the Learned Commissioner of income tax (Appeal), 3 3 ITA No.201-203/CTK/2018 Bhubaneswar has neither been based on the facts and circumstances

8
Section 143(3)8
Reassessment8
Disallowance8

SHISHU ANANTA MAHAVIDYALAYA,KHURDA vs. JCIT(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 201/CTK/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.201 To 203/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Shishu Ananta Mahavidyalaya, Vs. Jcit(Tds), Bhubaneswar Balipatana, Khurda-752102 Tan No. : Bbns00799 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 226(3)Section 272ASection 272A(2)(K)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

condoned, and the case may kindly be heard. 2. For That the order of penalty U/s 272A(2)(k) passed by the learned Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Bhubaneswar as well as the appeal order passed by the Learned Commissioner of income tax (Appeal), 3 3 ITA No.201-203/CTK/2018 Bhubaneswar has neither been based on the facts and circumstances

SHISHU ANANTA MAHAVIDYALAYA,KHURDA vs. JCIT(TDS), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 202/CTK/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Aug 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Jm & Shri L.P. Sahu, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita Nos.201 To 203/Ctk/2018 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Years :2010-2011 To 2012-2013) Shishu Ananta Mahavidyalaya, Vs. Jcit(Tds), Bhubaneswar Balipatana, Khurda-752102 Tan No. : Bbns00799 B (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri P.C.Mishra, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 226(3)Section 272ASection 272A(2)(K)Section 272A(2)(k)Section 273B

condoned, and the case may kindly be heard. 2. For That the order of penalty U/s 272A(2)(k) passed by the learned Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (TDS), Bhubaneswar as well as the appeal order passed by the Learned Commissioner of income tax (Appeal), 3 3 ITA No.201-203/CTK/2018 Bhubaneswar has neither been based on the facts and circumstances

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 496/CTK/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 500/CTK/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 499/CTK/2025[2015016]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 504/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 498/CTK/2025[2015016]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 502/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), , BHUBANEWSWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 497/CTK/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

ORISSA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HANDICRAFTS CORPORATION LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT,CIRCLE-1(1), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 503/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Respondent: Shri Asim Chakraborty, ld CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 271(1)(c)Section 272A(1)(d)

E R Per Bench : ITA No.496/CTK/2025 and ITA No.498/CTK/2025 are the appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders dated 5.8.2025 passed by the ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in Appeal No.NFAC/2013-14/10315114 and Appeal No.NFAC/2014-15/10314179 for the assessment years 2014-15 and 2015-16, in the matter of assessment year 143(3) of the Act. 2 आयकर

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment

SAHOO DIOSTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASST,CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE , AAYAKAR BHAWAN

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8/CTK/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment

SAHOO DISTRIBNUTORS (P) LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1/CTK/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASST.CIT,CENTRAL CIRCLE, AAYAKAR BHAWAN,SHELTER SQUARE,

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment

SAHOO DISTRIBUTERS PRIVATE LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. ASSTT. CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himansu Jena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 271DSection 272A(1)(d)

Section 40A(3) of the Act and in not considering the business exigency and application of Rule 6DD of I.T. Rules, the impugned addition made by the learned A.O. and confirmed by the learned CIT (Appeal) thus, being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be deleted in the interest of justice. 5. For that, when the reassessment