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.

26 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 282(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka122Chennai122Mumbai118Jaipur83Amritsar74Delhi72Kolkata67Panaji63Pune51Bangalore46Chandigarh31Hyderabad26Ahmedabad24Surat18Cochin14Indore13Lucknow11Rajkot10Raipur8Allahabad7Varanasi7Nagpur7Agra6Cuttack6Visakhapatnam6Jodhpur4Calcutta3SC2Patna2Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income15Section 14814Natural Justice13Section 26312Section 271(1)(c)12Condonation of Delay12Section 28211Section 153C10Cash Deposit

RR MARKETING,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1218/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Feb 2026AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri AV Raghuram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Vamsi Krishna
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 282

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present\nappeal.\nWe have heard the Learned Authorized Representatives of both\nparties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material\navailable on record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements\nthat have been pressed into service by the Ld. AR to drive home his\ncontentions.\nShri A.V. Raghuram, Advocate

BSCPL AURANG TOLLWAY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2

10
Section 143(3)9
Section 69A9
Section 1479
ITA 612/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay, wherein it was submitted that the appeal for the relevant assessment year was required to be filed within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order passed under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. However, the

Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 6. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee company filed its return of income for F.Y. 2018-19 on 27.10.2018, declaring a loss of Rs. 277,7468,523/- and the said return has been revised by filing a revised return on 21.01.2019, admitting

THALLA SRISAILAM GOUD,IBRAHIMPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 9(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 589/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Respondent: Ms. U. Mini Chandran, CIT-DR and Ms. Payal Gupta, SR-DR
Section 147Section 148

282 A it has to be signed by that authority and to be issued in paper form or communicated in electronic form by that authority in accordance with procedure prescribed. 19. The communication in electronic form has been prescribed in Rule 127 A of the Rules 1962 which provides a procedure for issuance of every notice or other document

DESU ENTERPRISES,ONGOLE vs. ITO., WARD-1, ONGOLE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 549/HYD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2015-16
For Respondent: \nShri Sashank Dundu, Advocate
Section 147Section 148

282 A it has to be signed\nby that authority and to be issued in paper form or communicated in electronic\nform by that authority in accordance with procedure prescribed.\n19. The communication in electronic form has been prescribed in Rule 127 A of the\nRules 1962 which provides a procedure for issuance of every notice or other\ndocument

PENNAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-5(1),, HYDERABAD

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

ITA 832/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)Section 263

condonation of the delay involved in filing the appeal. 10. Coming to the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the Ld. Pr. CIT for revising the order passed by the AO under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act, dated 20.09.2022, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. Pr. CIT had gravely erred in law and facts

ANANDARAO KOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-9(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 238/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad09 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.238/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2015-16) Shri Anandarao Kota, Income Tax Officer, Vs. Hyderabad. Ward 9(1), Pan: Cvopk0669Q Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: None. रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 06/10/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 09/10/2025 आदेश/Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 27.07.2024 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2015-16. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is That The Assessee Is An Individual, No Regular Return Of Income U/S.139 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 ("The Act") Was Filed For The A.Y. 2015-16. The Assessing Officer Based On The Information That The Assessee Made Cash Deposits Of Rs.1,03,97,300/- In The Savings Bank Account Formed Opinion That The Income Had Escaped Assessment

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 139Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282(1)

delay is condoned and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 6. On perusal of written submissions of the assessee and after hearing the Ld. DR, I find that the NFAC had issued notices of hearing through ITBA Portal. In my considered opinion, it is not a valid method and manner of service of notice as specified under the provisions

ASIAN TOURS AND TRAVELS,SECUNDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-10(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1/HYD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jan 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 Asian Tours & Travels, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Secunderabad, Ward-10(1), 9-4-212/94, Opp To Hyderabad. Railway Station, Hyderabad. Telangana – 500003. Pan : Aakfa8752H. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Mohd. Afzal, Advocate. Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, Sr.Ar. Date Of Hearing: 22/01/2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/01/2024

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, Sr.AR
Section 139(9)Section 143(1)

condone the delay to decide the issue on merits”. 8. From the perusal of the submissions of the assessee before NFAC, Delhi, observed the following : (1) it is the case of the assessee that it has not received any intimation by way of post or through notice server and was not aware about the order passed and demand raised

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 281/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal or petition cannot be allowed. In the present case, it is a dispute between the State in respect of a tax liability which is civil in nature and the same cannot be equated with the dispute between two parties and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 280/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal or petition cannot be allowed. In the present case, it is a dispute between the State in respect of a tax liability which is civil in nature and the same cannot be equated with the dispute between two parties and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon

BHUPAL INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -1(2), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 282/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

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

condonation of delay in filing of the appeal or petition cannot be allowed. In the present case, it is a dispute between the State in respect of a tax liability which is civil in nature and the same cannot be equated with the dispute between two parties and therefore, in our considered view, the case laws relied upon

MAYUR STONES, HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1092/HYD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1092 & 1093/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mayur Stones Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 11(1) Pan:Aarfm5050H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V. Sriram Niwas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate V. Sriram NiwasFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 271(1)(c)

condonation of delay. 6. We have considered the rival submission and carefully perused the relevant material available on record. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in filing the present appeals that the assessee was not aware about the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT (A) because the notices issued by the learned CIT (A) as well

MAYUR STONES, HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 1093/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.1092 & 1093/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2016-17 & 2017-18) Mayur Stones Vs. Income Tax Officer Hyderabad Ward 11(1) Pan:Aarfm5050H Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Advocate V. Sriram Niwas राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Advocate V. Sriram NiwasFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR
Section 271(1)(c)

condonation of delay. 6. We have considered the rival submission and carefully perused the relevant material available on record. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in filing the present appeals that the assessee was not aware about the impugned orders passed by the learned CIT (A) because the notices issued by the learned CIT (A) as well

MANAVADARIYA DHARMENDRA KANTILAL,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-7(1), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 318/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69A

condoned and the matter be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. 11. Per contra, Dr. Sachin Kumar, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (“DR”), submitted that the notices intimating fixation of hearing and the appellate order were validly served upon the assessee. The Ld. DR submitted that as per Section 282(1)(c) of the Act r.w Rule

RAGHUNATH SINGH,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-7(2), HYDERABAD

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

ITA 490/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 69A

condoned and the\nmatter be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.\n11. Per contra, Dr. Sachin Kumar, the learned Senior Departmental\nRepresentative (“DR”), submitted that the notices intimating fixation of\nhearing and the appellate order were validly served upon the assessee.\nThe Ld. DR submitted that as per Section 282(1)(c) of the Act r.w Rule\n127

MADAN MOHAN RAO PUVVADA,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 1152/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1152/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2017-2018 Madan Mohan Rao The Income Tax Puvvada, Hyderabad. Officer, Ward-5(1), Vs. Pin – 500 063. Hyderabad. Pan Agjpp4754H Telangana. Telangana. (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, Ca राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.02.2026 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 04.03.2026 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Sri P Murali Mohan Rao, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263

condone the delay of 158 days in filing the present appeal, subject to cost of Rs.5,000/- [Rs. Five Thousand Only] to be paid to Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund within a period of one month from the date of this order. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. “The order passed

ASIF ALI MOHD,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. ITO., WARD-1, MAHABUBNAGAR

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

ITA 408/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri P Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 44ASection 69A

condone the delay of 128 days in filing the instant appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the appeals for adjudication. 3 ITA.Nos.407 & 408/Hyd./2025 ITA.No.407/Hyd./2025 – A.Y. 2013-2014 : 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the instant appeal : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order

ASIF ALI MOHD,MAHABUBNAGAR vs. ITO., WARD-1, MAHABUBNAGAR

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

ITA 407/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri P Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 44ASection 69A

condone the delay of 128 days in filing the instant appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the appeals for adjudication. 3 ITA.Nos.407 & 408/Hyd./2025 ITA.No.407/Hyd./2025 – A.Y. 2013-2014 : 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds in the instant appeal : 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order

LEELA RAM CHOUDHARY,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 103/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad02 May 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri A.V.RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri Srinath Sadanala
Section 153CSection 282Section 69

Section 282 of the Act r.w.rule 127 of the Rules, and therefore Appellant could not put forth his case.\n2)\nWithout prejudice to the above, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of the AO, wherein the AO ha snot recorded proper satisfaction before initiating proceedings u/s 153C of the Act.\n3)\nWithout prejudice to the above, the Ld.CIT

SREE KANYAKA MUTUALLY AIDED CO-OP THRIFT CREDIT AND MARKETG. SOCIETY LIMITED,HINDUPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1, HINDUPUR

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

ITA 224/HYD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri D. Shree Raksha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR
Section 143(3)Section 56Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. ITA No.224/Hyd/2024 for A.Y. 2018-19 5. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is a Co- op Society which is carrying on the business of banking and providing credit facilities to its members, which is registered under the Andhra Pradesh Mutually Aided Co-operative Societies

NEELAKANTA REDDY MUDDAM ,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERS ,WARD-11(1) , HYDERABAD

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

ITA 70/HYD/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11 Neelakanta Reddy Muddam V Ito,Ward-11(1) F.No.202, 2Nd Floor S. Room No.1006, Kunapa Reddy’S Castle Singature Towers Towers, Anjaneya Nagar, Opp. Botanical Garden Moosapet, Kothaguda Hyderabad-522 002 Hyderabad-500 084

For Appellant: Shri M.V.Prasad, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.P.R.R.Murthyy,Sr.AR
Section 282

section 282 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Consequently, the assumption of jurisdiction for making the impugned reassessment is void ab initio and liable to be annulled. 8, Without prejudice to ground No.2: notice underSeetion.142(1) dated 24.11.2017 calling for a return of income for AY 2010-11 from the appellant is absolutely illegal and consequently void ab initio. Consequently