BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

47 results for “reassessment”+ Condonation of Delayclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai413Delhi346Mumbai339Kolkata273Ahmedabad233Jaipur134Hyderabad129Raipur126Pune123Bangalore93Chandigarh81Surat76Indore65Patna55Amritsar55Cuttack47Rajkot41Nagpur39Visakhapatnam38Cochin37Lucknow26Agra16Guwahati13Dehradun13Panaji11Jodhpur8Ranchi5Jabalpur5Varanasi4Allahabad4

Key Topics

Section 14737Reassessment29Penalty28Section 14825Addition to Income25Section 270A21Section 11(2)16Section 271A13Section 27113Reopening of Assessment

JM MINING AND TRADING PVT. LTD,TULSIPUR, CUTTACK vs. A.C.I.T CIRCLE2(1), CUTTACK CIRCLE, CUTTACK, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SHELTER CHOWK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 36/CTK/2024[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack23 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.36 & 37/Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011 11 & 2011-12 Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-2(1), Ltd., Ltd., At At-Madhusudan Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aabcj 2946 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/0 07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/0 /07/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Kumar JenaFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 249

reassessment record for the assessment year- 2010-11 and 2011-12 may required to be called for from the Ld. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1), Cuttack, Odisha, and after verification of the same this Hon'ble Bench may kindly be pleased to hear and disposed up the present appeals in the interest of justice. In the meantime

Showing 1–20 of 47 · Page 1 of 3

13
TDS13
Section 271(1)(c)11

JM MINING AND TRADING PVT. LTD.,TULSIPUR, CUTTACK vs. A.C.I.T, CIRCLE-2(1), CUTTACK, AAYAKAR BHAWAN, SHELTER CHOWK, CUTTACK

In the result, appeals of the assessee stand dismissed

ITA 37/CTK/2024[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack23 Jul 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicial & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.36 & 37/Ctk/2024 24 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011 11 & 2011-12 Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Jm Mining & Trading Pvt Vs. Acit, Circle Acit, Circle-2(1), Ltd., Ltd., At At-Madhusudan Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Avenue, Tulsipur, Cuttack Pan/Gir No Pan/Gir No.Aabcj 2946 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sandeep Kumar Jena, Sandeep Kumar Jena, Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 23/0 07/2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 23/0 /07/2024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Kumar JenaFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 147Section 147oSection 148Section 249

reassessment record for the assessment year- 2010-11 and 2011-12 may required to be called for from the Ld. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 2(1), Cuttack, Odisha, and after verification of the same this Hon'ble Bench may kindly be pleased to hear and disposed up the present appeals in the interest of justice. In the meantime

SULTAN ENTERPRISES PVT. LTD,,SUNDARPADA, BHUBANESWAR vs. PR. CIT-1, BHUBANESWAR

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 29/CTK/2023[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack26 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Before S/Shri George Mathan, Judicial & And Ramit Kocharassessment Year : 2015-16 Sultan Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Sultan Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Vs. Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar Pr. Cit, Bhubaneswar-1 At:Plot No.161, Azad Nagar, At:Plot No.161, Azad Nagar, Sundarpada, Bhubaneswar. Sundarpada, Bhubaneswar. Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Aascs 1016 R (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sidharth Ray, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay . It is already conceded by ld. Sr. Advocate representing assessee that the assessee does not have any case on the merits of the issue raised by ld. PCIT in his revisionary order dated 18.03.2021 passed u/s 263 of the 1961 Act. The only surving issue before me is the limitation for invoking the provisions of Section

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

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)

condonation of delay As such, both the orders passed by the learned A.O. and CIT(A), being not sustainable in the eye of law, needs to be quashed in the interest of justice. 2. For that, the learned CIT(A) has committed gross error of law as well as of fact, in dismissing the appeal of the Appellant Company

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 29/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 31/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 28/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/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 25/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/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 27/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/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 57/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 30/CTK/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal

For Appellant: S/Shri P.K.Mishra/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 22/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/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned

PRATAP CHANDRA SAHOO,JAJPUR vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 23/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/Himanshu Jena/Narahari Swain ena/Narahari SwainFor Respondent: Shri Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Saroj Kumar Dubey, CIT DR and Shri S.C.Mohant
Section 270ASection 271Section 271A

reassessment proceeding was going on during the Corona pandemic and the Appellant, on account of serious illness of his wife could not comply and additions were made for want of explanation and evidences, the learned CIT(Appeal) should have allowed sufficient opportunity or should have set aside the issues back to the file of the learned