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.

11 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 273clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna151Karnataka123Chennai66Mumbai64Delhi56Kolkata47Raipur41Amritsar37Bangalore32Jaipur32Visakhapatnam16Surat15Lucknow12Hyderabad11Ahmedabad10Pune10Cuttack5SC4Telangana4Indore3Cochin3Guwahati2Chandigarh2Nagpur2Rajkot2Rajasthan1Jodhpur1Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1Calcutta1Varanasi1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Addition to Income11Section 143(3)9Section 1446Section 115J6Section 1484Section 404Condonation of Delay4Section 1473Section 234A

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. and the remaining ground nos.4 to 16 for discussion can be summarized as follows: 1) Ground 4: Disallowance of Rs.24,94,00,000 under section 40A(3) of the Act. 2) Grounds 5 to 7: Disallowance of Rs.21,08,45,001 under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 3) Grounds 8 and 9: Payments made

3
Section 142(1)3
Cash Deposit2
Demonetization2

BRAMHANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, JAMMALAMADUGU,KADAPA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(3), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 512/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

Section 144Section 234ASection 249(3)Section 68

condonation of delay and on merits however, the facts of those cases are not identical with the facts of the assessee’s case before us and therefore those decisions cannot be applied to the case of the assessee. The decisions relied by the Ld. DR are as follows: Mela Ram & Sons (29 ITR 607); Commissioner Nagar Parishad vs. Labour Court

DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. BRAMHANI INDUSTRIES LIMITED, JAMMALAMADUGU, YSR DIST., YSR DIST.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 398/HYD/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Jan 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Sri Chandra Mohan Garga.Y. 2010-11 Bramhani Industries Limited, Vs. Dcit, Jammalamadugu. Circle-1(3), Pan: Aadcb 1666 M Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Ay: 2010-11 Dcit, Vs. Bramhani Industries Circle-1(2), Limited, Hyderabad. Jammalamadugu. Pan: Aadcb 1666 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sri Gowtham Jain Revenue By Sri K.V. Aravind, Sr. Standing Counsel For Dr Date Of Hearing: 12/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 06/01/2022 Order

Section 144Section 234ASection 249(3)Section 68

condonation of delay and on merits however, the facts of those cases are not identical with the facts of the assessee’s case before us and therefore those decisions cannot be applied to the case of the assessee. The decisions relied by the Ld. DR are as follows: Mela Ram & Sons (29 ITR 607); Commissioner Nagar Parishad vs. Labour Court

PATTABHI BARAPATI,KOTHAGUDEM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KOTHAGUDEM

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

ITA 1391/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad08 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita.No.1391/Hyd/2025 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Pattabhi Barapati, The Income Tax Officer, Kothagudem – 507 101. Ward-1, Kothagudem. Khammam District. Vs. Pin – 507 101. Pan Auhpb5358H Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By : Sri Poorna Chander Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By : Sri Karthik Manickam, Sr. Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 06.04.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 08.04.2026 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Rao:

For Appellant: Sri Poorna Chander Rao, CAFor Respondent: Sri Karthik Manickam, Sr. AR
Section 10(1)Section 250Section 253(3)

condonation of delay and submitted that ignorance of law cannot be a reason for delay in filing the present appeal. 4. We have considered the rival submissions and carefully perused the reasons explained by the assessee in the affidavit reads as under: “1. The Appellant humbly submits that the present appeal is being filed against the order passed

THE N.D.D. P AND T E.C.C SOCIETY LTD.,,NELLORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, NELLORE, NELLORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 611/HYD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda, Vice- & Shri Laliet Kumarआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.611/Hyd/2023 (निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Year: 2017-18) The Nddp & Tec Society Vs. Income Tax Officer Ltd, Ward-1 Nellore. Nellore. Pan:Aactt5322J (Appellant) (Respondent) /Assessee By: Shri M. Chandra Mouleswara निर्धारितीती द्वारा Rao, C.A /Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Sr.Ar राजस्‍व द्वारा ई की तारीखरीख/Date Of Hearing: 14/03/2024 सुनवाई की तारीखरीख/Pronouncement: 19/03/2024 घोषणा

For Appellant: Shri M. Chandra MouleswaraFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Sr.AR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69ASection 80P

Section 142(1) of the Act, the assessee was required to furnish the said return of income as required to be furnished as per the conditions and manner prescribed in Rule 12 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, on or before 31/03/2018. The assessee has failed to furnish return of income for A Y 2017-18 either

VENKATA SUDHAKAR SIMHADRI,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 382/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accounant Member आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.382/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2013-14) Shri Venkata Sudhakar Dcit, Circle 2(1), Vs. Hyderabad. Simhadri, Hyderabad. Pan : Avnps0649D (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Y. V. Bhanu Narayan Rao, C.A. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 18/06/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 19/06/2024

For Appellant: Shri Y. V. Bhanu NarayanFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 234BSection 69

delay of 56 days in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The grounds raised by the assessee reads as under : “1. That the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, upholding the assessment order passed u/s. 147 r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(2), HYDERABAD vs. STAR FEATURES INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE LIMITED , HYDERABAD

In the result appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 445/HYD/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad01 Feb 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. Mohan Alankamony & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Vs. Star Features Circle-3(2), International Private Hyderabad. Limited, Hyderabad. Pan: Aaccp 3799 G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri M.V. Anil Kumar Revenue By: Sri T. Sunil Goutam, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing: 01/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 01/02/2022 Order Per A. Mohan Alankamony, Am.:

For Appellant: Sri M.V. Anil KumarFor Respondent: Sri T. Sunil Goutam, Sr. AR
Section 115JSection 144Section 250(6)

condone the delay of 93 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 5. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of Development of Software and IT Enables Services. The assessee filed its return of income for the relevant assessment

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)., HYDERABAD vs. KSK ENERGY COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED., HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are allowed

ITA 1120/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas
Section 143(3)

delay in filing these appeals is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. As the grounds are common in all these appeals, but the financial results are different in all the above assessment years . For the sake and brevity

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD vs. KSK ENERGY COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are allowed

ITA 1745/HYD/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas
Section 143(3)

delay in filing these appeals is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. As the grounds are common in all these appeals, but the financial results are different in all the above assessment years . For the sake and brevity

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)., HYDERABAD vs. KSK ENERGY COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are allowed

ITA 1121/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas
Section 143(3)

delay in filing these appeals is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. As the grounds are common in all these appeals, but the financial results are different in all the above assessment years . For the sake and brevity

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)., HYDERABAD vs. KSK ENERGY COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals of revenue are allowed

ITA 1663/HYD/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Smt. Nivedita Biswas
Section 143(3)

delay in filing these appeals is neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the circumstances beyond its control. The same stands condoned. Cases are now taken up for adjudication on merits. 3. As the grounds are common in all these appeals, but the financial results are different in all the above assessment years . For the sake and brevity