Search: condonation of delay

2 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 7Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi21 Mumbai19 Chennai12 Hyderabad12 Kolkata10 Ahmedabad8 Jaipur6 Raipur5 Rajasthan4 Amritsar3 Calcutta3 Telangana3 Cuttack2 Bangalore2 Rajkot2 Orissa1 Cochin1 Guwahati1 SC1 Pune1

Key Topics

Section 143(2)9 Section 2634

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

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

S. M. AGRO PLANTERE& PROCESSORS PVT. LTD.,DHENKANAL vs. PCIR RANGE-1,, BHUBANESWAR

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

S. M. AGRO PLANTERE& PROCESSORS PVT. LTD.,DHENKANAL vs. PCIR RANGE-1,, BHUBANESWAR