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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 271Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Pune28Karnataka21Jaipur21Mumbai18Kolkata17Delhi17Chennai13Ahmedabad12Bangalore12Visakhapatnam7Hyderabad7Rajkot6Cochin6Nagpur5Amritsar4Agra3Surat3Indore3Raipur2Guwahati1SC1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 271D16Section 269S12Penalty7Section 143(1)4Section 1544Section 2504Exemption4Condonation of Delay4Section 143(3)3

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

In the result, three appeals i

ITA 972/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2019-20
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

271D", "Section 269SS", "Section 11", "Section 12", "Section 154", "Section 143(1)", "Section 275", "Section 273B"], "issues": "The primary issues were whether the delay in filing the audit report for claiming exemption should be condoned

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

Cash Deposit3
Addition to Income3
Section 269T2
ITA 1301/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

delay in filing the audit report (Form 10B) is condonable, and whether the denial of exemption under sections 11 and 12 is justified. 2. Whether the penalty levied under section 271D

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 973/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

271D for alleged violations of Section 269SS regarding cash transactions.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the delay in filing Form 10B was condonable

RAVI RISHI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(4), HYDERABAD

ITA 1300/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 271D

271D of the Income Tax Act for alleged violations of Section 269SS.", "held": "The Tribunal held that the delay in filing Form 10B, particularly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, warranted condonation

VENKATA RAMANA MURTHY BOLLAPRAGADA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1961/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1961/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2016-17) Venkata Ramana Murthy Vs. Income Tax Officer, Bollapragada, Ward-13(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Abmpb7770R (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri H. Srinivasulu, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/02/2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 26/02/2026 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M: The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Dated 27/10/2025, Which In Turn Arises From The Order Passed By The Additional/Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-13, Hyderabad Under Section 271D Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”), Dated 30/06/2022 For The Assessment Year

For Appellant: Shri H. SrinivasuluFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 271DSection 274Section 54F

section 271D of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”), dated 30/06/2022 for the Assessment Year 2 Venkata Ramana Murthy Bollapragada vs ITO (AY) 2016-17. The assessee has assailed the impugned order of the CIT(A) on the following grounds of appeal: “1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case

SYNDICATE RETIRED EMPLOYEES AND OTHER MUTUALLY AIDED COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,KURNOOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KURNOOL

ITA 172/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, SR-DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271D

delay of 3 days in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The brief facts of the cases are that the assessee is a society involved in the business of banking / providing credit facility to its members and others. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny for CASS

SYNDICATE RETIRED EMPLOYEES AND OTHER MUTUALLY AIDED COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,KURNOOL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KURNOOL

ITA 171/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Madan Mohan Meena, SR-DR
Section 143(3)Section 269SSection 269TSection 271D

delay of 3 days in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The brief facts of the cases are that the assessee is a society involved in the business of banking / providing credit facility to its members and others. The case of the assessee was selected for complete scrutiny for CASS