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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 194Iclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai14Delhi10Chennai9Kolkata7Bangalore3Varanasi2Pune2Hyderabad1Cochin1Ahmedabad1Jaipur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)8TDS5Disallowance5Section 201(1)4Section 14A4Deduction4Section 1943Section 194I3Section 403Section 65(12)

ORIENT PAPER & INDUSTRIES LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. J.C.I.T RANGE - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal in ITA 430/Kol/2013 of assessee is partly allowed and appeal in ITA 648/Kol/2013 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 430/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri P.M.Jagtap & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

For Appellant: Shri Asim Chaudhury, ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, ld.Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

194I of the Act on such expenses during the year under consideration. The CIT-A has given a categorical finding that the assesse has deposited TDS on such payments on 13-03-12 and directed the AO to verify the same and allow the same in A.Y 2012-13. These facts are not disputed by the both the parties

DCIT, CIR-26, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S TEWARI WAREHOUSING COMPANY, KOLKATA

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands allowed partly for statistical

2
Limitation/Time-bar2
Addition to Income2
ITA 1316/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Mar 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Raviassessment Year:2010-11 Dcit, Circle-26 M/S Tewari Warehousing Co. बनाम / Aayakar Bhawan Hide Shed Dump, Old V/S. Dakshin, 2, Gariahat Goragacha Road, Kolkata-88 Road, (South), [Pan No.Aacft 5579 K] Kolkata-68 .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Arindam Bhattacherjee, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Vikash Surana, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 31-01-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 16-03-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Kolkata Dated 14.03.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Jcit, Range- 53, Kolkata U/S 143(3)/144 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.03.2013 For Assessment Year 2010-11. The Grounds Raised By The Revenue Per Its Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Directing To Assess The Entire Gross Receipts S Business Income & Allow Deductions As Per Section 28 To 43 Of The It Act When Rental Income Of Rs.2,31,00,000/- Was Already Included In The Gross Receipts. 2. That The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Estimation Of Business Profits Of Rs.2,37,72,132/- Made By The Ao Though Rejection Of Assessee’S Books Of Account U/S 145(3) Considering The Facts Of The Case. 3. That The Ld. Cit(A)’S Order Is Contrary To The Law & Fact Of The Case. 4. The Appellant Craves Leaves To, Add To, Alter Or Modify Any One Or All Of The Grounds Of Appeal Mentioned Above.”

Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 194Section 27Section 28

condone the delay and admit the appeal of Revenue. 3. The brief description about the assessee-firm is that it is partnership firm and engaged in providing warehousing, go-down, blending and packing services. The assessee is providing such services under the agreements with the big tea companies such as Tata Tea, Hindustan Unilever (HUL), Pataka Tea etc. Such activity

I.T.O WD - 8(3),KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S RUIA SONS PVT LTD., KOLKATA

In the result the appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 365/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm] I.T.A No. 365/Kol/2013 Assessment Year : 2009-10 I.T.O., Ward-8(3), -Vs.- M/S. Ruia Sons Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aaccr 3949 Q] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, Cit For The Respondent : Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate

For Appellant: Shri Arup Kumar Sinha, CITFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kataruka, Advocate
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194CSection 194JSection 301Section 40

condone the delay and admit the appeal for regular hearing. 3. The brief facts arising in this case are that the assessee company filed its return of income for A.Y.2009-10 on 24.09.2009 declaring loss of Rs.30,97,3290/-. Notices u/s 143(2) and 143(1) of the Act were issued to the assessee and as and when called

SUBHAG MERCANTILE (P) LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, TDS WD-59(3), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 165/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Jun 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Raviassessment Year :2004-05

Section 194Section 194ISection 201Section 201(1)

condone the said delay and proceed to dispose of this appeal of the assessee on merit. 4. Only issue raised by assessee is that Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the order of Assessing Officer by sustaining the disallowance of ₹3,76,566/- including the interest of ₹1,25,522/- on account of non-deduction of TDS on interest u/s.194-A

DCIT, CIR-2, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S PROMPT INFOTECH (P) LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1485/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No. 1485/Kol/2014 Assessment Year : 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-2, -Vs.- M/S Prompt Infotech P.Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [Pan : Aabcp 5237 C] (Respondent) (Appellant) For The Appellant : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. C.I.T., Sr.Dr For The Respondent : Shri B.K.Poddar, Fca Date Of Hearing : 25.05.2017. Date Of Pronouncement : 25.05.2017. Order

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. C.I.T., Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri B.K.Poddar, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 194ISection 65(12)

delay is condoned and the appeal of the revenue is admitted for adjudication. 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CITA was justified in deleting the disallowance of depreciation of Rs. 34,37,133/- on eased out computers, in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2 M/s. Prompt Infotech

ITO, WARD - 34(4) , KOLKATA vs. M/S. GODHULI DEALCOM LLP, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the Cross Objection raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2307/KOL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Manish Borad

Section 143(3)

condone the delay of 996 days in filing of the Cross Objection and admit the same for adjudication. 3. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) erred in deleting the securities premium reserve of Rs. 12,87,23,000/- which stood transferred

RAKESH ENTERPRISE,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-44(2), KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 541/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara, Hon’Ble[Through Virtual Court] Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Rakesh Enterprise Ito, Ward – 44(2), Kolkata / 11/E/1, Gorapada Sarkar Lane, V/S. Ultadanga, Kolkata – 700 067. Pan No.Aalfr 0329 N अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent .. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Soumitra Choudhury, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent Shri Jayanta Khanra, Jcit, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 154Section 194ISection 40A(3)

condonation petition/affidavit that the relevant file/papers were not available. All these solemn averments have gone unrebutted from the assessee side. Hon’ble apex court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katji & Ors [1987] 167 ITR 0471 (SC) held long back that the cause of substantial justice prevails over all technical aspects. I thus treat this 150 days’ delay in filing