Search: condonation of delay

5 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 199clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 26320 Section 1476 Section 201(1)4 Section 143(3)3 Section 2503 Section 2013 Revision u/s 2633 Limitation/Time-bar3 Natural Justice2 TDS2 Addition to Income2

KNS VINAYAK MINING AND INFRA PRIVATE LIMITED, KORBA,KORBA vs. ACIT, KORBA, KORBA

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

ITA 483/RPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.483/Rpr/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Kns Vinayak Mining & Infra Private Limited 151, Indira Commercial & Residential Complex, Transport Nagar, Korba-495 767 Pan: Aadck7102K

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Priynaka Patel, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 5

Section 5 of 4 KNS Vinayak Mining and Infra Private Limited Vs. ACIT, Korba the Limitation Act, 1963 regarding the condonation of delay in respect of case of land acquisition has observed and held on the aspect of delay that although the delay cannot be condoned without sufficient cause, the merits of the case could not be discarded solely

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M P P W D DN,,RAJNANDGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BHILAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 294/RPR/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur19 Oct 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 294/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Executive Engineer, M P P W D Dn P W Division (B/R) G.E. Road, Kailash Nagar, Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Tan: Jbpe00177C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Tds), Bhilai (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/shri Arvind Chand Surana &For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR

Section 133ASection 194CSection 194JSection 201Section 201(1)

199/- and interest u/s. 201(1A) of Rs. 78.304/-. 3. Also, it was observed by the A.O. that the assessee had failed to comply with the mandate of Section 194J of the Act and had made payments towards technical services to one single party, viz. M/s. Creative Architect, Raipur, of Rs.8,51,117/- without deducting tax at source

ANIL NACHRANI,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 47/RPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am (Ita No. 47/Rpr/2022) (Assessment Year: 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Veekaas S Sharma, CAFor Respondent: Shri Debashish Lahiri, CIT-DR

Section 143(2)Section 147Section 263Section 263(1)

199 (Allahabad). It was observed by 28 Shri Anil Nachrani the tribunal by relying on the order of the ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Westlife Development Ltd. (supra) that as the assessment order was in itself null and void as it was based on a non-Est return, therefore, the Commissioner could not have exercised his jurisdiction under section

MARUTI CLEAN COAL AND POWER LTD.,RAIPUR vs. PR. COMMISIONER INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR

ITA 55/RPR/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 55/Rpr/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2011-12 Maruti Clean Coal & Power Ltd. Ward No.42, Building No.14, Civil Lines, Near Income Tax Colony, Chhattisgarh-492 001. Pan : Aadcm4810C .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms. Ananya Kapoor & Ms. Soumya Singh, Advocates. Revenue By :Shri P. K Mishra, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 05.08.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.10.2022

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Ms. AnanyaFor Respondent: Shri P. K Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 263(2)

condonation of the impugned delay involved in filing of the present appeal by the assessee appellant. 2.2 We have given a thoughtful consideration and considering the circumstances leading to the impugned delay involved in filing of the present appeal r.w the aforesaid order of the Hon’ble Apex Court admit the same. 3. We shall first deal with the additional

ARUNA TIWARI,RAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1, RAIPUR, RAIPUR

ITA 90/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jul 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 90/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Smt. Aruna Tiwari 762, Sundar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan: Adbpt4977B .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Raipur (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Begani, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR

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

delay is found to be covered by the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Suo Moto Writ Petition (Civil) No.3 of 2020 dated 23.03.2020, which was thereafter modified vide further order(s) dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021, 23.09.2021 and 10.01.2022, as per which for the purpose of limitation the period from 15.03.2020 to 28.02.2022 was to be excluded