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 53Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Raipur38Bangalore23Chennai17Mumbai16Patna7Kolkata7Delhi5Hyderabad5Pune3Visakhapatnam2Indore2SC2Chandigarh1Calcutta1Ahmedabad1Telangana1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 10B9Section 143(3)7Condonation of Delay6Section 2635Deduction4Addition to Income4Section 453Section 54G3Capital Gains

MEDICARE TPA SERVICE (I) PVT. LTD., ,KOLKATA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, KOL - 4, KOLKATA , KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1045/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi] I.T.A. No. 1045/Kol/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Medicare Tpa Service (I) Pvt. Ltd………………………......…………………………………………Appellant 6B, Bishop Lefroy Road Ground Floor 10, 6B, Paul Mansion Bhowanipore Kolkata – 700 020 [Pan : Aadcm 1682 L] Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata -4..................................................…..…......Respondent Appearances By: Shri Subash Agarwal, Adv., Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri A.K. Nayak, Cit D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 22Nd, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 10Th , 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 - 4, (Ld. Pr. Cit) Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, (The ‘Act’), Dt. 27/02/2018, For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. At The Outset We Find That There Is A Delay Of 13 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. 3. The Assessee Is A Company & Is In The Business Of, Health Insurance Claim Processing Etc. It Filed Its Return Of Income On 30/09/2013, Declaring Income Of Rs.4,80,10,710/-. The Assessing Officer Completed Assessment U/S 143(3) Of The Act, Determining The Total Income Of The Assessee At Rs.5,37,81,250/- Under The Normal Provisions & At Rs.2,72,98,018/- As Book Profit U/S 115Jb Of The Act. The Ld. Pr. Cit, Issued A Showcause Notice Dt. 04/2/2017 Proposing Revision Of The Assessment Order Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act On 04/12/2015, By Invoking His Powers U/S 263 Of The Act,On The Following Points:-

Section 115JSection 143(3)
3
Limitation/Time-bar3
Section 2502
Revision u/s 2632
Section 2(47)
Section 244A
Section 263

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 3. The assessee is a company and is in the business of, health insurance claim processing etc. it filed its return of income on 30/09/2013, declaring income of Rs.4,80,10,710/-. The Assessing Officer completed assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act, determining the total income of the assessee at Rs.5

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE - 7(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. EMAS EXPRESSWAY PRIVATE LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1162/KOL/2023[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Mar 2025AY 2005-2006

Bench: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR CHOUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 143(1)Section 250

53A, Mirza Galib Street, 2nd Floor, Kolkata - 700016 [PAN: AAACE9530E] ..…................................ Respondent Appearances by: Assessee represented by : Vishal Jain, AR Department represented by : P.N. Barnwal, CIT-DR Date of concluding the hearing : 29.01.2025 Date of pronouncing the order : 03.03.2025 O R D E R PER SANJAY AWASTHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: 1. In this case, the ITAT Registry has informed that there

D.C.I.T CIR - 6,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S KILBURN ENGINEERING LTD, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1987/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am ] Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri R.S.Biswas, CITFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Singhi, AR
Section 45Section 54GSection 54G(2)

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the revenue. ITA No.1987/Kol/2013-M/s. Kilburn Engineering Ltd. A.Y.2009-10 4. As far as the issue raised by the revenue in the grounds of appeal is concerned, the same relates to eligibility of the assessee’s for exemption u/s 54G of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act) in respect of a sum of Rs.10

SHUVRO CHATTARAJ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT , BURDWAN

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

ITA 226/KOL/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Jain, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54E

condoning the delay. The appellant further pray that the denial of appeal on this technical ground would cause irreparable damage and losses to the appellant. 12. That the above information and explanation are true and correct and the deponent adheres to them.” 3.1. The impugned order passed u/s. 263 of the Act is dated 29.05.2020 which is passed during

DCIT CIR-8, KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S NATURAL PRODUCTS EXPORT CORPN. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1512/KOL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Sept 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Shrimahavir Singhand Shriwaseem Ahmedassessment Year :2009-10

Section 10BSection 143(3)

condone the delay of appeal and proceed to hearing the appeal. 3. The first issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the deduction under section 10B of the Act for the assessment year 2009-10 whereas the assessment year 2008-09 was the last eligible assessment year

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA vs. SALASAR FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES PVT. LTD., KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1926/KOL/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.1926/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 131Section 250

53A, Mirza Ghalib Street (4th Floor), Kolkata-700016. (PAN: AANCS0249R) Appearances by: Shri Subhro Das, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR appeared on behalf of the Appellant Shri Miraj D. Shah, AR appeared on behalf of the Respondent Date of concluding the hearing: 25/11/2024 Date of pronouncing the order: 17/12/2024 आदेश / ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member : The captioned appeal has been

DCIT, CC-1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. KKALPANA INDUSTRIES INDIA LIMITED, KOLKATA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 452/KOL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Sanjay Awasthiआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.452/Kol/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Dcit, Cc-1(4), Kolkata Vs Kkalpana Industries India Ltd. 2B, Pretoria Street, Middleton Row, Kolkata-700071 Pan No. :Aabck 2239 D (अपीलधर्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) निर्धाररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate & Ms. Puja Somani, Ca रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri P.N.Barnwal, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 13.11.2024, Passed By The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata-20, Passed In Din & Order No.Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1070338584(1), For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. Shri P.N.Barnwal, Ld.Cit-Dr Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue & Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate With Ms. Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. 3. A Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Find That The Appeal Of The Revenue Has Been Filed Belatedly By 28 Days. In This Regard, The Revenue Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Sufficient Reasons Which Are Plausible & Not Found To Be False. Thus, The Delay Of 28 Days In Filing The Appeal Is Condoned & Appeal Is Admitted For Hearing.

For Appellant: Shri S.K.Tulsiyan, Advocate and Ms. Puja Somani, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.N.Barnwal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 45

delay of 28 days in filing the appeal is condoned and appeal is admitted for hearing. 2 4. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that he was invoking his liberty under Rule 27 of the ITAT Rules, 1963 in regard to the issue which has been held against the assessee