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.

78 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 114clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai155Chennai133Karnataka128Delhi108Kolkata78Bangalore57Hyderabad53Jaipur49Ahmedabad45Calcutta36Chandigarh35Panaji35Lucknow22Pune18Cochin16Indore12Cuttack12Varanasi10Raipur9Surat8Amritsar8Guwahati6Visakhapatnam5Allahabad5Jabalpur5Rajkot5Jodhpur4Nagpur3Agra3SC3Telangana2Andhra Pradesh1Orissa1Rajasthan1Patna1Gauhati1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 26380Section 143(3)79Addition to Income35Section 14732Section 14A32Section 115J30Section 6825Section 25024Section 80I

OCEAN MARINE ENVIRONMENT COATINGS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS, WARD - 2(2), KOLKATA

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

ITA 295/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249(2)

114, Deodar Street, Kolkata-700019. (PAN: AAGCM5600F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal

OCEAN MARINE ENVIRONMENT COATINGS PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS, WARD - 2(2), KOLKATA

Showing 1–20 of 78 · Page 1 of 4

24
Condonation of Delay24
Limitation/Time-bar23
Deduction21

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

ITA 296/KOL/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kochar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249(2)

114, Deodar Street, Kolkata-700019. (PAN: AAGCM5600F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Appellant by : Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Vijay Kumar, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 24.05.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29.05.2023 O R D E R PER BENCH: All these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of Ld. CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal

THE GOODHOPE FOUNDATION,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O.,WARD-1(3) (EXEMPTION), KOLKATA

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

ITA 2584/KOL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey&Shri Rakesh Mishra]

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 250Section 253

Section 253 of the IT Act shall be within sixty days of the date of the service of the appellate order and in the case of the assessee the date of service being the 9th May, 2024, the time limit for filing of appeal has expired on 8th of July, 2024. 3. That the issue of the assessee was exemption

DCIT, CIRCLE - 5(1) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. L & T FINANCE LTD., , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1781/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of L & T Finance Ltd. Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Vs. 7Th Floor, A Wing, Block Bp, Kolkata Sector V, Kolkata-700091. (Pan: Aacca1963B) (Appellant) (Respondent) & C.O. No. 10/Kol/2023 In Ita No.1781/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-15 L & T Finance Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. 7Th Floor, A Wing, Block Bp, Income Tax, Circle-5(1), Sector V, Kolkata-700091. Kolkata. (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Soumen Adak, FCA & Shri Ashish Poddar, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Kapil Mondal, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 5Section 92B

condone the delay in filing of the appeal as well as the cross-objection and proceed to adjudicate them on merits. 3. Since the assessee has raised pure question of law in its Cross Objection, we are inclined to take up the Cross Objection filed by the assessee before adjudicating on the appeal by the revenue. Ground of Cross Objection

M/S SIKAR ZILLA WELFARE TRUST ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), EXEMPT, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 691/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Am & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Jm M/S Sikar Zilla Welfare Income Tax Officer, Trust Ward 1(3), Exempt 1A, Sikar Bhawan, Vs. Ashutosh Dey Lane, Kolkata-400071 Kolkata-700006 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aadts3808D Assessee By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Revenue By : Shri Gautam Patra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 28.08.2024

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Patra, CIT DR
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 39(1)

114 (Bombay) has held that where the assessee Trust belatedly submitted Form-10B, along with return, on account of oversight by the Chartered Accountant, the delay in filing of Form-10B deserves to be condoned. In fact, some relevant portions from the said order deserves to be extracted as under: “■ Admittedly, Petitioner is a charitable trust and had been filing

SAHABUDDIN QUADIRI,MURSHIDABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-42, MURSHIDABAD, MURSHIDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1617/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. S.S.Godara & Dr. A.L.Saini[Assessment Year: 2010-11] Sahabuddin Quadiri, Vs Dcit, Saratpally, Chuanpur, Circle-42, Laldighi, 57, Berhampore, R.N.Tagore Road, Berhampore, Murshidabad-742101. Murshidabad-742101. Pan-Aaapq7976P (Assessee) (Respondent)

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 5. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 30.03.2015, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT)-14, SAHABUDDIN QUADIRI [Assessment Year: 2010-11] Kolkata, for the assessment year 2010-11. Grievances raised by the assessee are as follows. (1) That

STARPOINT VINIMAY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ASST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) WARD-1(1), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 340/KOL/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Aug 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 5

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1) The Learned NFAC/CIT(A) erred in confirming additions made in the assessment order by passing ex-parte order and without deciding the appeal of merits and hence the order of NFAC may be set-aside

SAHARA TRADECOMM PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

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

ITA 282/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am] I.T.A. No. 282/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S. Sahara Tradecomm Pvt. Ltd..................................…………………………………Appellant 9/12, Lal Bazar Street Mercantile Building, 3Rd Floor, Room No. 10, Block –B. Kolkata – 700 006. [Pan: Aaocs 1875 J] Ito, Ward 1(4) Kolkata...................……………………………………………................Respondent P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. Appearances By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Duggar, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Satyajit Mondal, Addl. Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 30, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 08, 2018 Order This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Cit (Appeals) – 1, Kolkata Dated 22.08.2017 Whereby He Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee In Limine By Treating The Same As Barred By Limitation.

Section 143(3)

114 days on the part of the assessee in filing this appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application seeking condonation of the said delay on the ground that its authorised representative Shri Rajesh Duggar, FCA had suffered with serious injury during the relevant period and since he had to undergo medical brain surgery

SURESH KUMAR AGARWAL,GANGTOK vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 3(2),, GANGTOK

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

ITA 1571/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 1571/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Suresh Kumar Agarwal,……………..…....……Appellant Chno 11(2), Alfa Building, Mg Marg, Gangtok-737101, Sikkim [Pan:Atnpa4913E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,…..Respondent Circle-3(2), Gangtok-737101, Sikkim

Section 139Section 142(1)Section 69A

delay is condoned. 4. Facts in brief are that the assessee is an individual, who had deposited substantial cash in bank accounts during demonetization period (9th November, 2016 to 30th December, 2016), but did not file his income tax return for the assessment year 2017-18. The data reveals that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.1

THE JUTE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 339/KOL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Jalan, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S. Dutta, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 154

condone the delay of 114 days and take up the appeal for its adjudication. 3. The present appeal before us is against the order passed by Ld. AO u/s. 154 read with section

M/S PARAMOUNT PROPERTIES & ESTATE DEVELOPMENTS LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed on legal grounds

ITA 93/KOL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Dec 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedi.T.A. No.93/Kol/2016 Assessment Year 2005-06 M/S. Paramount Properties & I.T.O., Wd-3(1), Kolkata. P-7, Chowringhee Square, Estate Developments Ltd. -Vs- Kolkata – 700 069. 3, Pretoria Street, 4Th Floor, Kolkata – 700 071. [Pan : Aabcp 8731 B] (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

condone the said delay and proceed to dispose of this appeal of the assessee on merit. 4. In view of the above, we decided to proceed and to adjudicate the matter on the basis of materials available on record. The assessee in Ground Nos.1 & 2 has challenged the initiation of reassessment proceedings u/s 147 of the Act. 5. Briefly stated

DCIT, LTU-2, KOLKATA vs. M/S CENTURY PLYBOARDS (I), LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objections of assessee are allowed

ITA 2149/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap(Kz) &Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm] Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

114 taxman.com 181) 8. Next comes assessee's cross-appeal ITA No.485/Kol/2019. It emerges at the outset the same suffers 1535 days' delay in filing. The assessee's detailed condonation petition reads that it has sought to delete section

D.C.I.T CIR - 55,KOLKATA., KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL HOMOEO LABORATORIES, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 205/KOL/2013[2008-09.]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jun 2016

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed, A.M. & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, J.M.)

For Appellant: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl.CIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 40

delay is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling Homoeopathic medicines and earns its major income from the said activities. During the year under consideration, the assessee filed its return of income on 10.10.2008 showing therein total income

SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 12, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2574/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

condone the delay and for that we refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC). Assessment Year 2009-10 3. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld. Pr. CIT in exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. Brief facts of the case are that

SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 12, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2576/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

condone the delay and for that we refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC). Assessment Year 2009-10 3. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld. Pr. CIT in exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. Brief facts of the case are that

SATYA PRAKASH SHARMA ,KOLKATA vs. PR.CIT, KOLKATA - 12, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2575/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Nov 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 263

condone the delay and for that we refer to the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 167 ITR 471 (SC). Assessment Year 2009-10 3. The main grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld. Pr. CIT in exercising his revisional jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. Brief facts of the case are that

SHRI NARAYAN SARAF,KOLKATA vs. PR.C.I.T.-12, KOLKATA

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

ITA 2214/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Nov 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon’Ble] I.T.A. No. 2214/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Shri Narayan Saraf………………………….................……....……………..…..……...……………...…Appellant 56, N.S. Road 2Nd Floor Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan: Akkps 6352 B] Vs. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax -12, Kolkata………………………..........….....……......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate & Shri Jaydeep Chakraborty, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Dr. P.K. Srihari, Jcit, Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 13Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 29Th, 2019 O R D E R Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :- This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata -12, (Hereinafter The “Ld. Pr. Cit”), Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (The ‘Act’), Dt. 14/03/2019, For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. At The Outset We Find That There Is A Delay Of 131 (One Hundred Thirty One) Days In Filing Of This Appeal. After Perusing The Petition For Condonation, We Are Convinced That The Assessee Was Prevented By Sufficient Cause From Filing The Appeal On Time. Hence The Delay Is Condoned & The Appeal Is Admitted.

Section 143(3)Section 263

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 3. The assessee has originally filed its return of income on 30/09/2014 declaring total income of Rs.19,04,650/-, for the impugned Assessment Year. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act on 18/07/2016 determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.21

VIVEKANANDA MATH,NORTH TWENTY FOUR PARGANAS vs. ITO, WARD 1(2), EXEMPT,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 471/KOL/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)

Section 12A(1)(b) of the Act, the AO denied the exemption u/s 11 and assessed the total income of the assessee at Rs. 3,58,34,330/-. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the appeal of the assessee has also been dismissed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the assessee

DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S. MADRAS ELASTOMERS LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 48/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Sept 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं/And "ी वसीम अहमद, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

Section 144Section 80I

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 2. Ground nos. 1 and 2 of revenue’s appeal is against the action of Ld. CIT(A) in allowing deduction u/s. 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) of Rs.4,70,63,306/- in violation of Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules

M/S PREMIER IRRIGATION ADRITEC (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIR-11(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 387/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 2(24)Section 250Section 3Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

condoned. Ground No.1 & 2 – Vide Ground Nos.1 & 2, the assessee has 4. agitated the confirmation of addition of Rs.10,10,774/- made by the Assessing Officer invoking the provisions to section 43B of the Act for delay in depositing employees contribution to provident fund and employees state insurance. 5. Heard both the sides. At the outset, we note that