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 164(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai150Karnataka101Delhi88Chennai88Chandigarh56Bangalore50Kolkata37Cochin31Jaipur30Pune27Visakhapatnam19Hyderabad19Lucknow18Ahmedabad18Patna11Surat8Raipur8Indore7Telangana6Panaji5Jodhpur4Rajkot3Calcutta2SC2Agra2Allahabad2Jabalpur2Cuttack2Rajasthan1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)15Condonation of Delay9Section 80P8Section 115J7Section 279(1)7Section 1437TDS7Penalty6Section 143(3)

GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the assessee allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1110/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Sri S. Rama Rao, Advocate For Revenue : Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 80I

164 taxmann.com 748 [Mum.Tribu.]. The appellant company accordingly pleaded that the delay in filing of appeal is not with a deliberate intention or gross negligence and is not an intentional fact and also the delay in filing of appeal will not benefit the assessee company in any manner. The Learned Counsel for the Assessee, therefore, submitted that, the delay

MULAKALA MOHAN KRISHNA,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

5
Deduction5
Section 80I4
Section 253(3)3

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 432/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri V. Siva Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr.Sachin Kumar, SR-AR
Section 143(1)Section 80I

condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.432/Hyd/2025 4 6. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is the proprietor of M/s. Sarvotham Care, having income from two units, one being a solar power generation unit eligible for deduction under section 80IA

CURIA INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED(AFTER MERGER AMRI INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED),HYDERABAD vs. ACIT CIRCLE -1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 164/HYD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Ms. Ananaya KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

164,165 & 166/Hyd/2022 Assessment Years: 2012-13,2013-14 & 2014-15 Curia India Private Limited Vs. ACIT (after merger of Amri India Masab Tank Pvt.Ltd.) Hyderabad Plot No.9, Phase-I M.N.Park Genome Valley Turkapally, Shameerpet Mandal, Rangareddy district Hyderabad-500 003 PAN : AAFCA1469D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Ms. Ananaya Kapoor, Advocate Revenue by: Shri Kumar Aditya, Sr.AR Date of hearing

GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, these three appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1112/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1111, 1112 & 1113/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2018-2019, 2020-2021 & 2021-2022 Gayatri Projects Limited, The Dcit, Hyderabad – 500 082. Vs. Circle-2(1), Telangana. Hyderabad – 500 084. Pan Aaacg8040K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri S Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri S Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 253(3)

164 taxmann.com 748. 5. It is well settled proposition that a liberal and pragmatic view has to be adopted in condonation of delay in the interests of natural justice when there has been no intentional delay in filing of appeal as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in [1987] 167 ITR 471 Collector, Land Acquisition vs MST. Katiji and Others

GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, these three appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1111/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1111, 1112 & 1113/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2018-2019, 2020-2021 & 2021-2022 Gayatri Projects Limited, The Dcit, Hyderabad – 500 082. Vs. Circle-2(1), Telangana. Hyderabad – 500 084. Pan Aaacg8040K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri S Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri S Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 253(3)

164 taxmann.com 748. 5. It is well settled proposition that a liberal and pragmatic view has to be adopted in condonation of delay in the interests of natural justice when there has been no intentional delay in filing of appeal as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in [1987] 167 ITR 471 Collector, Land Acquisition vs MST. Katiji and Others

GAYATRI PROJECTS LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, these three appeals of the Assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1113/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1111, 1112 & 1113/Hyd/2025 Assessment Years 2018-2019, 2020-2021 & 2021-2022 Gayatri Projects Limited, The Dcit, Hyderabad – 500 082. Vs. Circle-2(1), Telangana. Hyderabad – 500 084. Pan Aaacg8040K (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri S Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Ms. U Mini Chandran, Cit-Dr

For Appellant: Sri S Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. U Mini Chandran, CIT-DR
Section 253(3)

164 taxmann.com 748. 5. It is well settled proposition that a liberal and pragmatic view has to be adopted in condonation of delay in the interests of natural justice when there has been no intentional delay in filing of appeal as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in [1987] 167 ITR 471 Collector, Land Acquisition vs MST. Katiji and Others

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 720/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. C.S.Sree Lekha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 279(1)

condoned and the appeal is not admitted. Elite Infraprojects Private Ltd. 6.4 It is noteworthy that five other appeals for various AYs were also filed online with a delay of 3 to 7 years without any reasonable explanation being offered for the same. The appellant has also failed to comply with various notices issued

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 721/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. C.S.Sree Lekha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 279(1)

condoned and the appeal is not admitted. Elite Infraprojects Private Ltd. 6.4 It is noteworthy that five other appeals for various AYs were also filed online with a delay of 3 to 7 years without any reasonable explanation being offered for the same. The appellant has also failed to comply with various notices issued

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 716/HYD/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. C.S.Sree Lekha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 279(1)

condoned and the appeal is not admitted. Elite Infraprojects Private Ltd. 6.4 It is noteworthy that five other appeals for various AYs were also filed online with a delay of 3 to 7 years without any reasonable explanation being offered for the same. The appellant has also failed to comply with various notices issued

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 718/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. C.S.Sree Lekha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 279(1)

condoned and the appeal is not admitted. Elite Infraprojects Private Ltd. 6.4 It is noteworthy that five other appeals for various AYs were also filed online with a delay of 3 to 7 years without any reasonable explanation being offered for the same. The appellant has also failed to comply with various notices issued

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 719/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. C.S.Sree Lekha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 279(1)

condoned and the appeal is not admitted. Elite Infraprojects Private Ltd. 6.4 It is noteworthy that five other appeals for various AYs were also filed online with a delay of 3 to 7 years without any reasonable explanation being offered for the same. The appellant has also failed to comply with various notices issued

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 722/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. C.S.Sree Lekha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 279(1)

condoned and the appeal is not admitted. Elite Infraprojects Private Ltd. 6.4 It is noteworthy that five other appeals for various AYs were also filed online with a delay of 3 to 7 years without any reasonable explanation being offered for the same. The appellant has also failed to comply with various notices issued

ELITE INFRAPROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 717/HYD/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Ms. C.S.Sree Lekha, ARFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, DR
Section 115JSection 143Section 143(1)Section 279(1)

condoned and the appeal is not admitted. Elite Infraprojects Private Ltd. 6.4 It is noteworthy that five other appeals for various AYs were also filed online with a delay of 3 to 7 years without any reasonable explanation being offered for the same. The appellant has also failed to comply with various notices issued

JOSHITA INFRA DEVELOPERS LLP,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1055/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 44A

condone the delay of 168 days in adjudication. 6. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Limited Liability Partnership, engaged in the business of marketing open plots by purchase and selling through Agents, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2022-23 on 22.07.2022, declaring a business loss

ITO., WARD 14(1), HYDERABAD vs. JOSHITA INFRA DEVELOPERS LLP, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 672/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 44A

condone the delay of 168 days in adjudication. 6. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is a Limited Liability Partnership, engaged in the business of marketing open plots by purchase and selling through Agents, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2022-23 on 22.07.2022, declaring a business loss

SYED KHADER HUSSAIN,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are\nallowed for statistical purposes

ITA 121/HYD/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: Shri K.C. Devdas, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR
Section 10Section 147Section 148Section 270A

1)\nHyderabad\n(Respondent)\n\nनिर्धारिती द्वारा / Assessee by: Shri K.C. Devdas, CA\nराजस्व द्वारा / Revenue by:: Shri Srinath Sadanala, DR\n\nसुनवाई की तारीख /Date of hearing: 16/04/2025\nघोषणा की तारीख / Pronouncement: 16/04/2025\n\nआदेश/ORDER\n\nPer Vijay Pal Rao, Vice President\n\nThese two appeals by the assessee are directed against\nthe composite orders dated, 05/12/2024

KOTHAPALLY FARMERS SERVICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,MEDAK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 770/HYD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Smt. Ambika SFor Respondent: Sri Rohit Mujumdar,DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

delay of 415 days in filing the impugned appeals before the Tribunal are also condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society carrying on business of procurement of seed, fertilizers and gives farm credits to the members of the Society. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer

KOTHAPALLY FARMERS CO- OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,MEDAK vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SANGAREDDY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 771/HYD/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Smt. Ambika SFor Respondent: Sri Rohit Mujumdar,DR
Section 143(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

delay of 415 days in filing the impugned appeals before the Tribunal are also condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Cooperative Society carrying on business of procurement of seed, fertilizers and gives farm credits to the members of the Society. During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act, the Assessing Officer

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL vs. SATHISH PONNAM, PARKAL

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 929/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Mar 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: CA KA Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, SR. AR
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 68

delay of 28 days in filing the appeal before the\nTribunal is condoned and the appeal of the Revenue is\nadmitted for adjudication.\n8. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that\nthat in so far as additions made by the Assessing Officer\ntowards cash deposits into bank accounts and estimation of\n10% profit by the learned CIT(A), the assessee