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.

32 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 144C(8)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi118Mumbai83Hyderabad33Kolkata32Bangalore29Chennai26Pune13Jaipur12Ahmedabad10Indore8Chandigarh5Nagpur5Visakhapatnam4Rajkot3Dehradun2Cochin2Raipur1SC1Lucknow1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)35Section 15320Limitation/Time-bar19Section 14A18Section 92C18Addition to Income18Section 115J17Section 26317Section 80H

ZYDUS HEALTHCARE LTD,GANGTOK vs. ACIT, CIR. 3(2), GANGTOK

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 139/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Girish Agrawali.T.A. No. 139/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healhcare Limited,……..................Appellant (Successor To Zydus Healthcare Sikkim), 4Th Floor, ‘D’ Wing, Zudus Corporate Park, Scheme No. 63, Survey No. 536, Khoraj (Gandhinagar), Nr. Vaishnodevi Circle, Ahmedabad, Gandhinagar, Gujrat-382481 [Pan: Aaacg1895Q] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Circle-3(2), Gangtok, Sikkim-737101 Appearances By: Shri Ajit Kumar Jain, Ca & Sonal Pandey, A.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri G. Hukugha Sema, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing : January 18, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : February 20, 2023 O R D E R

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 156Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

144C, the assessee was required to file his objections to the Dispute Resolution Panel within 30 days from receipt of the Draft Order. 8 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Zydus Healthcare Limited This exercise has been carried out by the ld. Assessing Officer quite late, the impugned order, which attained finality on 13.12.2019. Thereafter he cannot change the color

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2

15
Disallowance15
Section 14812
Transfer Pricing11

ACIT, CIRCLE-7.1, KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 745/KOL/2024[1992-1993]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 May 2025AY 1992-1993

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153Section 80H

8,25,31,889/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHD and (ii) ₹11,73,61,202/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act. 04. In the appellate proceedings, the CIT (A) dismissed the appeal on this issue after taking into account contentions raised by the assessee and thus upheld the order

ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA. ,KOLKATA vs. DCIT,CIR-7(1),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1318/KOL/2023[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 May 2025AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153Section 80H

8,25,31,889/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHD and (ii) ₹11,73,61,202/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act. 04. In the appellate proceedings, the CIT (A) dismissed the appeal on this issue after taking into account contentions raised by the assessee and thus upheld the order

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, AAYAKAR BHAWAN vs. ITC LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 744/KOL/2024[1993-1994]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 May 2025AY 1993-1994

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153Section 80H

8,25,31,889/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHD and (ii) ₹11,73,61,202/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act. 04. In the appellate proceedings, the CIT (A) dismissed the appeal on this issue after taking into account contentions raised by the assessee and thus upheld the order

ACIT, CIRCLE-7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. HI TECH SYSTEMS AND SERVICES LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1318/KOL/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jan 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan &For Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 151Section 153Section 80H

8,25,31,889/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHD and (ii) ₹11,73,61,202/- on account of excess deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act. 04. In the appellate proceedings, the CIT (A) dismissed the appeal on this issue after taking into account contentions raised by the assessee and thus upheld the order

ITC LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-7(1), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and both\nthe appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1343/KOL/2023[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 May 2025AY 1992-93
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 153Section 80H

8\nITC LIMITED; A.Ys.1992-93 & 1993-94\nITA Nos.1343& 1318/KOL/2023, 744 & 745/KOL/2024\nhas to be excluded for calculating the limitation period for passing the\nassessment order. The interim order staying the passing of\nassessment order was passed by the Court on 22.12.1997. The\nAssessee's writ petition for the assessment year 1992-93 was finally\ndisposed

LINDE INDIA LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, KOLKATA

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 319/KOL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 Linde India Ltd. Deputy Commissioner Of (Formerly Boc India Limited) Income Tax, Circle-11(1), “Oxygen House”, P-43, Vs. Kolkata. Taratala Road, Kolkata-700 088, West Bengal. (Pan: Aaacb2528H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, CA and Shri Alpesh Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kallol Mistry, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 156

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C of the Act dated 22 April 2022 (communication for DIN issued to the assessee on 8 February 2023) manually without mentioning DIN in its body and the same was passed in complete violation of the Circular bearing no. 19/2019 dated 14 August 2019.” 3. We also note that registry has observed about inordinate delay

I.T.O.,WARD-1(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

ITA 2652/KOL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 263

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. ITA No.2652/Kol/2019 & CO No. 15/Kol/2020 PCM Strescon Overseas Ventures Ltd., AY 2012-13 2. At the outset, the Ld. A.R. for the assessee Shri Akkal Dudhwewala submitted that ITA No. 2652/Kol/2019 is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2012-13 dated 24.07.2019, wherein

M/S PCM STRESCON OVERSEAS VENTURE LTD.,SILIGURI vs. PCIT-1, , KOLKATA

In the result, both appeal preferred by the revenue (ITA No

ITA 112/KOL/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey]

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 153Section 263

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. ITA No.2652/Kol/2019 & CO No. 15/Kol/2020 PCM Strescon Overseas Ventures Ltd., AY 2012-13 2. At the outset, the Ld. A.R. for the assessee Shri Akkal Dudhwewala submitted that ITA No. 2652/Kol/2019 is preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for AY 2012-13 dated 24.07.2019, wherein

M/S LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 617/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Mawheet Dalal, Advocate & Shri Gunjan Khanna, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 148Section 40Section 92C

8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). As the issues involved in both the appeals are identical in nature, they are taken up together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. Labvantage Solution Pvt. Ltd. AY 2009-10 & 2010-11 ITA No. 1051/Kol/2015 – Asst Year

M/S LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1051/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Mawheet Dalal, Advocate & Shri Gunjan Khanna, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 148Section 40Section 92C

8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). As the issues involved in both the appeals are identical in nature, they are taken up together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. Labvantage Solution Pvt. Ltd. AY 2009-10 & 2010-11 ITA No. 1051/Kol/2015 – Asst Year

DCIT, CIR-2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S LABVANTAGE SOLUTIONS PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 599/KOL/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata19 Oct 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri Mawheet Dalal, Advocate & Shri Gunjan Khanna, ARFor Respondent: Shri G. Mallikarjuna, CIT, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144C(15)(b)Section 144C(5)Section 144C(8)Section 148Section 40Section 92C

8) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). As the issues involved in both the appeals are identical in nature, they are taken up together and disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. Labvantage Solution Pvt. Ltd. AY 2009-10 & 2010-11 ITA No. 1051/Kol/2015 – Asst Year

ACIT, CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA , KOLKATA vs. M/S. BATA INDIA LTD., KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed and the CO is dismissed

ITA 1844/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata in ITA No. 1844/Kol/2017 for the assessment year 2009-10;

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 43B

condonation of the said delay as under: “I, Durgesh Singh, S/o Surendra Singh, residing at Flat No. 508 Shakti apartment sector 15 Part II Gurgaon-122001, do hereby solemnly affirm that; 1. That, I am working as General Manager -Taxation of M/s Bata India Ltd, entrusted by the company to look after the tax matters of the company. 2. That

MANORAMA DEVI JAISWAL,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 35(4), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 612/KOL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) I.T.A. No. 612/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-2015 Manorama Devi Jaiswal,……………..………Appellant 4, Amartolla Street, Bagri Market, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Achpj3514H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,……………………….…..Respondent Ward-35(4), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, 110, Shanti Pally, E.M. Byepass, Kolkata-700107 Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Susanta Saha, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: June 25, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: July 28, 2025 O R D E R

Section 144CSection 154Section 263

delay is condoned. 4. The contention of the ld. Counsel for the assessee is that the ld. CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal of the assessee mentioning that the assessment order itself is non-est as declared by the Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata dated 17.11.2021, and he could not have exercised his revisionary jurisdiction in respect of a null and void

MCLEOD RUSSEL INDIA LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 4(1),, KOLKATA

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

ITA 384/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(1)Section 144C(1)Section 14A

delay is hereby condoned. 2 I.T.A. No. 384/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Mcleod Russel India Ltd. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee company is engaged in the cultivation, processing, and sale of tea. The assessee filed its return of income for AY 2020-21 on 13.02.2021 declaring a total loss of Rs. (-) 8

M/S. PRICEWATERHOUSE COOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 195/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav(Kz) & Shri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं.य/ Assessment Year: 2014-15 बनाम M/S.Pricewater House A.C.I.T,Cir-1(1), Kolkata Coopers Private Limited Aaykar Bhavan, P-7 V/S. Block-Ep, Plot-Y 14 Chowringhee Square, Salt Lake City, Sector- Kolkata-700 069. V, Kolkata-700 091. Pan: Aabcp9181H अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent .. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Shri Bikash Jain, Ca, Ld.Ar Appellant/Assessee ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Md. Ghyas Uddin, Cit/Ld.Dr Respondent/Department सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 14-06-2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date 27-06 -2022 Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Manish Borad, Am. This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [ Hereinafter, Referred To As ‘The Act’] By The Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax [ In Short, Hereafter Referred To As ‘The Pcit’], Kolkata-1. 2. At The Time Of Hearing The Registry Has Informed That The Present Appeal Is Time Barred By 32 Days. The Assessee 1. Ay 2014-15 Price Water House Coopers P.Ltd

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 263Section 263(1)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. That on the facts and in law and in the circumstances of the case, the order dated 24 March, 2021 passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax - 1, Kolkata (hereinafter referred to as 'Ld. Pr. CIT') under section

ACIT, CIR. 1(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S COOKSON INDIA (P) LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Cross Objection of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 250/KOL/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Oct 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2010-11 Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Cookson India Pvt. Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vs Ltd., 10, Old Post Office Kolkata. . Street, Room No. 15A, Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Aabcc1679B) (Appellant) (Respondent) & Cross Objection No. 02/Kol/2022 In Ita No.250/Kol/2021 Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Cookson India Pvt. Assistant Commissioner Of Ltd., 10, Old Post Office Vs Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Street, Room No. 15A, . Kolkata. Kolkata-700001. (Cross Objector) (Respondent)

For Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 92C

section 143(3) r.w.s. 144C 2 M/s. Cookson India Pvt. Ltd., AY 2010-11 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) Act by DCIT, Circle-3, Kolkata, dated 23.04.2014. 2. At the outset, we note that there is a delay of 54 days in filing the present appeal for which application for condonation of delay

BISWADIP GHOSH,KOLKATA vs. D.C.I.T., CIRCLIE - 1(1), I.T.,, KOLKATA

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

ITA 10/KOL/2026[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Apr 2026AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

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. For that the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in passing an ex parte order without providing any reasonable opportunity of hearing. 2. For that the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered that

ALMATIS ALUMINA PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ,NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

In the result, the instant appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 242/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Hon’Ble & Shri Girish Agrawal, Hon’Bleassessment Years: 2016-17 Almatis Alumina Private Additional/Joint/Deputy/Assistant Limited Commissioner Of Income-Tax/ Vs. Kankaria Estate, 2Nd Floor Income-Tax Officer, National E- 6, Russel Street Assessment Centre, Delhi Kolkata - 700071 [Pan: Aacca2120N] (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Akhilesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri G. Hukuga Sema, Cit, D/R सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2023 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/05/2023 O R D E R Per Girish Agrawal: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Order U/S 144C(13) R.W.S. 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (In Short The “Act”) By Additional/Joint/Deputy/Asstt. Cit, National E-Assessment Centre, (Hereinafter Referred To As “Ld. Ao”) Dt. 24/03/2021, Pursuant To Directions By The Ld. Dispute Resolution (Drp) U/S 144C(5), Dt. 10/11/2020. 2. We Note That There Is A Delay Of 73 (Seventy Three) Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before The Tribunal. The Impugned Order Is Dated 24/03/2021, Which Falls Within The Period Of Pandemic Of Covid-19. Petition For Condonation Of Delay Is Placed On Record By Assessee Explaining The Reasons For Delay, Owing To Pandemic Of Covid-19 During That Time. It Is Noted That The Period Of Delay Falls During The Time Of 2 Assessment Years: 2016-17 Almatis Alumina Private Limited

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Hukuga Sema, CIT, D/R
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. General ground 1.1 That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Ld. Transfer Pricing Officer, (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. TPO”) passed u/s 92 CA(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, (hereinafter referred

D.C.I.T CIR - 10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S EUREKA FORBS LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1247/KOL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jan 2026AY 2013-14
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 92C

section 115JB of the Act to ₹4,19,505/-.\n18.1 This issue has been decided in ITA No. 1246/KOL/2019 for AY\n2012-13 in the preceding para no. 11.5 of the order. In view of the\nfinding for AY 2012-13, Ground No. 3 of the appeal is allowed.\n19. Ground Nos. 4, 5 and 6 relate