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.

96 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 234Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai243Delhi198Bangalore172Ahmedabad98Hyderabad96Chennai69Jaipur64Pune56Chandigarh51Kolkata49Nagpur21Karnataka21Indore18Lucknow15Rajkot15Patna14Surat12Raipur10Allahabad7Visakhapatnam7Jodhpur6Cochin6Jabalpur6Agra6Amritsar3Cuttack2Panaji1SC1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)136Section 153C127Section 12A77Addition to Income61Section 153A48Search & Seizure47Disallowance41Cash Deposit39Section 11

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the above terms

ITA 156/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakhsmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

condoning the delay in filing the appeal / non-deposit of tax. Admittedly as recorded by the ld.CIT(A) in its order dt.04.03.2011, the amount of taxes was adjusted by the Revenue. However subsequently, the ld.CIT(A) in its order dt.19.02.2013 had mentioned that the amount of Rs.2 lakhs was not adjusted towards the self assessment tax but was adjusted towards

Showing 1–20 of 96 · Page 1 of 5

33
Section 6830
Section 14827
Section 234A26

THE WARANGAL DISTRICT COOPERATIVE CENTRAL BANK LIMITED,HANAMKONDA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 364/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364/Hyd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22) The Warangal District Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Cooperative Central Bank Income Tax, Limited, Hanamkonda, Circle-3(1), Warangal. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabtt3137G (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 11/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 14/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234CSection 36(1)(va)

condonation of delay in filing Form 10IF, and that no relief of interest paid or payable under sections 234A, 234B

RAHUL AGARWAL,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1266/HYD/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Feb 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2020-21 Rahul Agarwal, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Hyderabad. Central Circle 1(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aifpa2046P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Santi Pavan Kumar, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Sadanala Srinath, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 05.02.2025 11.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement:

For Appellant: Shri Santi Pavan Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sadanala Srinath, Sr.AR
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 226(3)Section 234BSection 68

section 234B of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, under the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that assessee, assessee filed his return of income for A.Y. 2020-21 on 10.01.2021 admitting total income of Rs. 37,38,670/-. On credible information that assessee and one Chetan Agarwal are regularly conducting dabba trading

LOVEEN BABU VUPPALA,SECUNDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1121/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1121/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Loveen Babu Vuppala Vs. Income Tax Officer Secunderabad Ward-9(1) [Pan : Alppv1796E] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms.Aluru V Sai Sudha, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri R.Kumaran, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 30/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.08.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)], Kolkata, Pertaining To A.Y.2021-22 On The Following Grounds : 1. The Cit(A) Erred In Not Condoning The Delay & Not Admitting The Appeal 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Holding That There Was No Sufficient Cause For Condoning The Delay In Filing The Appeal

For Appellant: Ms.Aluru V Sai Sudha, ARFor Respondent: : Shri R.Kumaran, DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234A

234B & 234C by CPC 8. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of hearing 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, deriving income from salary in India and outside India from his employment, filed his return of income for the A.Y.2021-22 on 31.01.2022, declaring total income of Rs.3

ORBIS REAL ESTATE FUND I,HYDERABAD (AUTH. REP.) vs. ADIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2 - 2, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 785/HYD/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2025AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri Sai Sourabh K, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Narender Kumar Naik
Section 143(3)Section 154

delay of 356 days in filing the appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. The grounds of appeal of the assessee are as under : “ (1) The Ld. AO erred in not considering the residential status of the Appellant and he/she has erred in disputing the TRC issued by the government authorities of Mauritius

MALLESHWARI NARAMULLA,RANGA REDDY vs. ITO., WARD-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1195/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1195/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Smt. Malleshwari Vs. Income Tax Officer Naramulla Ward 2(1) Ranga Reddy Hyderabad Pan:Aulpn5122B (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocates Snsr Chinmai & S Sandhya राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri T. Venkanna, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 24/12/2025 आदेश/Order Per Madhusudan Sawdia, A.M.:

For Appellant: Advocates SNSR Chinmai and S SandhyaFor Respondent: : Shri T. Venkanna, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 271(1)(b)

condoned the delay and decided the appeal on merits. 6. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)/NFAC ought to have decided the grounds of appeal agitated before him. 7. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)/NFAC ought to have seen that Assessing Officer Ward-11(1), Hyderabad has no jurisdiction to issue notice

SUJATHA KUMAR,BANASHANKARI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, GUDUR

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1439/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1439/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year – 2016-2017 Mrs. Sujatha Kumar, The Income Tax Officer, Bengaluru – 560 085 Ward-1, Gudur-524101. Vs. Andhra Pradesh Pan Ahmpk3172C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Siddesh Nagraj Gaddi राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Sri Abhinav Pitta, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: CA Siddesh Nagraj GaddiFor Respondent: Sri Abhinav Pitta, Sr. AR

condone the delay of 97 days in filing the present appeal. 6. The assessee has raised the following grounds : 1. “The order of the Ld.AO, insofar as it is against the appellant, is opposed to law, equity, and the weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Ld.AO's order is against the principle of natural

SUJALA PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,NANDYAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee company are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 77/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Us:

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 69A

condonation of delay involved in filing of the appeal. 14. The assessee company has filed before us an application seeking admission of certain documents as additional evidence, as under: a. Cash sales details for Rs. 1.39 Crs. b. Summary of cash deposits [Rs. 8.65 Crs] and withdrawals from various banks [Rs. 12.59] c. Bank statements related to 8 Banks

SUJALA PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED,NANDYAL vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, KURNOOL

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee company are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 78/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 69A

condonation of delay involved in filing of the appeal. 14. The assessee company has filed before us an application seeking admission of certain documents as additional evidence, as under: a. Cash sales details for Rs. 1.39 Crs. b. Summary of cash deposits [Rs. 8.65 Crs] and withdrawals from various banks [Rs. 12.59] c. Bank statements related to 8 Banks

FEDERATION OF AP COOPERATIVE URBAN BANKS AND CREDIT SOCIETIES LIMITED HYD,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 464/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sooda N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.464/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2019-20) Federation Of Ap Vs. Income Tax Officer Cooperative Urban Banks Ward 9(1) & Credit Societies Ltd. Hyderabad Hyd, Hyderabad Pan:Aaaaf7350F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 29/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/11/2025

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri V. Ravish Bhatt, Sr. DR

condone the delay of 290 days in filing the appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merits. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. The order issued u/s 143(1) of the Act is contrary to the facts and also to the law applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The disallowance of deduction

MOHAMMAD HABEEB UDDIN,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 8/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.08/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2017-18) Mohammad Habeeb Uddin, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 11-2-323-Cross Bazaar, Ward-7(1), Ghat, Hyderabad, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500004. Pan: Aaqph8462F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Rajesh Vaishnav, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of 20/08/2025 Hearing: घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 08/10/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Cit(Appeals), Nfac, Dated 30.12.2019 For The Assessment Year 2017-18. The Assessee Has Assailed The Impugned Order On The Following Grounds Of Appeal Before Us:

For Appellant: Sri Rajesh Vaishnav, CAFor Respondent: Sri Posu Babu Alli, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 133ASection 234ASection 271ASection 69A

Section 115BBE of the Act without considering the legal arguments and factual evidence submitted by the Assessee. 4. The Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in upholding the order passed Ld. by AO initiating penalty u/s 271AAC and imputing interest u/s 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 5. Without prejudice to the above, it is humbly prayed that

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 397/HYD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 404/HYD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 394/HYD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 395/HYD/2019[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 405/HYD/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 396/HYD/2019[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 408/HYD/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIRMAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NIRMAL

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 398/HYD/2019[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2006-07

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years

AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE,NIZAMABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, NIZAMABAD

In the result the assessee appeal in ITA No

ITA 403/HYD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 May 2019AY 2005-06

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahmanassessment Year: 2005-06 Agricultural Market Vs. Income Tax Officer, Committee, Bodhan. Ward-2, Pan: Aaala 0787 C Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri Nilanjan Dey, DR
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 234BSection 36(1)(xii)

234B of the IT. Act.” 3. Upon hearing both the parties, we find that under the proviso to sub-section (2) to section 12A of the Act, the provisions of section 11 & 12 shall apply even in respect of the Assessment Years prior to the year in which the registration u/s 12A was granted, provided the Assessments for those years