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.

86 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 150clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna305Chennai281Mumbai138Delhi122Karnataka102Kolkata86Ahmedabad84Bangalore83Hyderabad81Jaipur60Pune43Chandigarh36Calcutta34Nagpur27Surat23Indore22Lucknow18Rajkot13Visakhapatnam11Amritsar10Cochin8Allahabad8Cuttack8Varanasi7Kerala6Panaji6Guwahati5Raipur5Jodhpur4SC3Jabalpur2Dehradun2Rajasthan1Telangana1Andhra Pradesh1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)65Addition to Income58Section 14A41Disallowance34Section 26330Section 25028Condonation of Delay26Limitation/Time-bar25Deduction

DCIT, CIR. 4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S MANAKSIA ALUMINIUM CO. LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 92/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)

section 143(3)/144C of the Act on 27.12.2017 framed by ld. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata. 2. We notice that both the instant appeals by Revenue are against the same order of ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the later appeal bearing ITA No. 281/KOL/2021 is dismissed as infructuous. 3. The appeal bearing ITA Nos. 92/KOL/2021 has been filed before

DCIT-4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S MANAKSIA ALUMINIUM CO. LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 281/KOL/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Showing 1–20 of 86 · Page 1 of 5

23
Section 10(38)22
Section 14721
Section 6820
Section 143(3)

section 143(3)/144C of the Act on 27.12.2017 framed by ld. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata. 2. We notice that both the instant appeals by Revenue are against the same order of ld. CIT(Appeals). Therefore, the later appeal bearing ITA No. 281/KOL/2021 is dismissed as infructuous. 3. The appeal bearing ITA Nos. 92/KOL/2021 has been filed before

RAJIB CHAKRABORTY,KOLKATA vs. ITO- WARD-30(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1279/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 253(3)Section 253(5)

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 8 I.T.A. No.1279/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Rajib Chakraborty. 14. The only effective issue raised in the grounds of appeal is that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and on law in upholding the order of AO wherein the AO has denied the benefit of exemption claimed

DCIT, KOLKATA vs. L & T FINANCE LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 377/KOL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 14ASection 249(3)Section 250

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 13. The Revenue has taken three grounds of appeal, out of that Ground No. 3 is a general ground, which does not call for recording of any specific finding. 14. The rest of the two grounds read as under:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

L & T FINANCE LIMITED (SUCCESSOR OF L & T INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED, NOW MERGED),KOLKATA vs. CIT(A),NFAC,ITD, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 645/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Aug 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 14ASection 249(3)Section 250

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 13. The Revenue has taken three grounds of appeal, out of that Ground No. 3 is a general ground, which does not call for recording of any specific finding. 14. The rest of the two grounds read as under:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

M/S MEDI DRIPS CARRIES PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WD-12(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 471/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.471/Kol/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year:2008-2009) M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd Vs. Ito, Ward-12(4), 8Th Floor, R.No.818, P-7, Chowringhee Square, 4, Synagogue Street, Aayakar Bhawan, Kolkata-700001 Kolkata-700069 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No.: Aabcm 8139 Q .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ashish Rustogi, Aca Revenue By : Shri Saurav Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 01/03/2017 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 08/03/2017 आदेश / O R D E R Per Dr. Arjun Lal Saini, Am: The Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Pertaining To Assessment Year 2008-09, Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld. Cit(A)-Xii, Kolkata, In Appeal No.490/Xii/12(4)/10-11, Dated 11.11.2013, Which In Turn Arises Out Of An Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act 1961, (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’), Dated 28.12.2010. 2. The Said Captioned Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Time Barred By Four Days. The Assessee Filed The Petition For Condonation Of Delay & Expressed The Reasons Of Delay. After Verification Of Petition We Found That There Was A Reasonable Cause For Four Days Delay In Filing The Appeal. Even Ld Dr Did Not Object To Condone The Delay. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal For Hearing. 3. Brief Facts Of The Case Qua The Assessee Are That The Assessee Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 30.09.2008. Subsequently The 2 M/S Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. Assessee Company Filed Its Revised Return Of Income On 9-12-2008

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Rustogi, ACAFor Respondent: Shri Saurav Kumar, JCIT
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case qua the assessee are that the assessee company filed its return of income on 30.09.2008. Subsequently the 2 M/s Medi Drips Carries Pvt. Ltd. assessee company filed its revised return of income on 9-12-2008 showing total loss at Rs.3

SRI ANIL KUMAR JAIN,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CC-XX, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1111/KOL/2015[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2016AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm ] I.T.A No.1111/Kol/2015 Assessment Year : 2009-10 Sri Anil Kumar Jain -Vs.- D.C.I.T., Central Circle-Xx, Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Acfpj0712R) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.C.Rathi, FCAFor Respondent: Md.S.S.Alam, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 194CSection 40

delay in filing this appeal is condoned. 4. Ground No.1 raised by the assessee is with regard to the disallowance of Rs.10,400/- which was rents payable by the assessee for the period prior to the previous year relevant to A.Y.2009-10. It was the plea of the assessee that the assessee was a tenant of the premises at 23A, Kalakar

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. DHANSAR ENGINEERING COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 295/KOL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 153ASection 68

delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee is that the assessee had filed its original return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act on 30.09.2010 declaring income of Nil. Later, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act 1961, was conducted on 30.08.2012 on the assessee as a part

THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 937/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, CIT, ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 48

condone the delay and admit the appeal of Revenue for hearing. ITA No. 937/K/18 ITA No. 938/K/18 ITA No. 1439/K/18 A.Y 2010­11 The Peerless General Finance & Investment Co.Ltd 3 6. We shall take summarized and concise ground No.1, which reads as follows: (1). Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee in ITA No. 937/Kol/2018, for A.Y 2010­11 and Ground

THE PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO. LTD.,,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 938/KOL/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey, J.M. & Dr.A.L.Saini, A.M.)

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Singh, CIT, ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 48

condone the delay and admit the appeal of Revenue for hearing. ITA No. 937/K/18 ITA No. 938/K/18 ITA No. 1439/K/18 A.Y 2010­11 The Peerless General Finance & Investment Co.Ltd 3 6. We shall take summarized and concise ground No.1, which reads as follows: (1). Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee in ITA No. 937/Kol/2018, for A.Y 2010­11 and Ground

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

LAXMIDHAN TRADELINK PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1428/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Bench raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi has erred in law as well as on facts of the case by passing order u/s 250 dated 20/03/2023 dismissing the appeal filed

SMT MADHU CHHANDA SIRKAR,KOLKATA vs. CIT-XVII,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1704/Kol/2011 and ITA No

ITA 1084/KOL/2014[2007-2008]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2018AY 2007-2008

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Hangsing, CIT(DR)&

150/- is confirmed. As regards the addition of a sum of Rs.3,40,697/- on account of excess payment Silver found at the time of survey, the A. O. has mentioned in the assessment order (on pages 9 and 10) that the difference had been admitted by the assessee in her submissions furnished before him on 30/11/2009. In this connection

SMT. MADHU CHHANDA SIRKAR,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1704/Kol/2011 and ITA No

ITA 1704/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Hangsing, CIT(DR)&

150/- is confirmed. As regards the addition of a sum of Rs.3,40,697/- on account of excess payment Silver found at the time of survey, the A. O. has mentioned in the assessment order (on pages 9 and 10) that the difference had been admitted by the assessee in her submissions furnished before him on 30/11/2009. In this connection

DCIT, CIRCLE - 50, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. SMT. MADHU CHANDA SIRKAR, KOLKATA

In the result ITA No.1704/Kol/2011 and ITA No

ITA 1567/KOL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Smt. Madhumita Roy, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri Soumitra Chowdhury, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.Hangsing, CIT(DR)&

150/- is confirmed. As regards the addition of a sum of Rs.3,40,697/- on account of excess payment Silver found at the time of survey, the A. O. has mentioned in the assessment order (on pages 9 and 10) that the difference had been admitted by the assessee in her submissions furnished before him on 30/11/2009. In this connection

DCIT CIR-4(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. ARIHANT PLANTATION PVT LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1238/KOL/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 250Section 68

section 68 of the I. T. Act, 1961 in respect of the head of unsecured loan.” 3. In ground no.1 of the appeal, it has been mentioned that the delay of 150 days (whereas as per the Registry the delay is of 171 days) in filing the appeal before this Tribunal was due to non-availability of assessment record

ACIT-6(2), KOLKATA vs. M/S NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD., KOLKATA

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

ITA 498/KOL/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee is a limited company engaged in the insurance Page 2 of 20 I.T.A. No.: 498/KOL/2020 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/s. National Insurance Co. Ltd. business. Loss of Rs. 5,06,84,425/- declared

ARIES DESIGNERS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD - 1(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1876/KOL/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Mar 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(2)Section 145(3)

delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee engaged in the business of trading in gray fabrics and investment in real estate projects, filed its return of income for AY 2017-18 declaring total income of Rs. 1,78,150/-. The case was selected for scrutiny, notices

DCIT, CIRCLE-10(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S INDIAN OIL PETRONAS (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the Cross Objections of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1885/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri Aby T. Varkey)

Section 250Section 32(1)(iiia)Section 80

section 32A of the Act. It was inter alia observed as under: " ... There is no dispute that the plant in respect of which the assessee claimed deduction was owned by it and WDS installed after 31-3-1976, in the assessee's industrial undertaking for excavating, mining and processing mineral ore Mineral ore is not excluded by the Eleventh Schedule