SRI TIRUMALA ESTATES AND FARMLANDS,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

Bench: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

condonation of delay is liable to be rejected [Classic Ispat Pvt. Ltd. v. Janak Steel Tubes Ltd. (1998) 93 Comp Cas 165, 167, 169 (Punj)]. Reference may also be made to Girdhar Lal M. Pittle vs. Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction [(1998) 94 Comp Cas 225, 228 (Del). 2.7 In this case the appeal is filed by delay

OMMI SANDEEP,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

condone the delay of 24 days\nPage No. 2\nin filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on\nmerits in the following paragraphs.\n4.\nThe only issue to be adjudicated in the above cited appeal is whether the\nAppellant Cooperative Society is entitled for deduction under section 80P(2)(a)(i)\nof the Act, when

AUDREY BERNICE ROY,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, VISAKHAPATNAM

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

10. Be that as it may, I find that the appeal filed by the assessee before the CIT(A) involves an inordinate delay of 1503 days. As is discernible from the “Form 35” filed by the assessee before CIT(A), the assessee at S.no.15 had stated that the delay of 1503 days in filing the appeal had crept

KOSURU KRISHNAVENI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3), VISAKHAPATNAM

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

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआईटीए. नं. / Ita No. 414/Viz/2025 (A.Y. 2016-17) Kosuru Krishnaveni V. Income Tax Officer - Ward – 3(3) Flat No. 401, Jeevan Visakha Apartments Income Tax Office Mntc Colony, Seethammadhara Infinity Towers, Sankaramatam Road Visakhapatnam – 530013 Visakhapatnam – 530016 [Pan:Aotpd2598D] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

5 Kosuru Krishnaveni statutory, the court must show utmost consideration to such litigant. Further the length of delay is immaterial, it is the acceptability of the explanation and that is the only criteria for condoning the delay. 8. In such a situation, no doubt filing of an appeal is a right granted under the statute to the assessee

LAKSHMI NARAYANA KOTHA,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAKINADA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons in all the appeals that, on 24.04.2025, while travelling on a two-wheeler, he slipped and fell, sustaining fracture of the right ankle, and was advised bed rest for fifty days. Thereafter, on 22.06.2025, he was affected with dengue fever and confined to the house for another 2-3 weeks. These unforeseen health circumstances disrupted his regular routine, and in the process of going to the counsel's office for signing th

10. The Ld. CIT-DR for the revenue Shri Badicala Yadagiri, on the other hand, supporting the order of Ld. CIT(A), submitted that, the assessee could not explain the reasons for the delay in filing of the appeal by filing an application for condoning the delay, even though the Ld. CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity of hearing, which

LAKSHMI NARAYANA KOTHA,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAKINADA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

Bench: the Tribunal. The assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons in all the appeals that, on 24.04.2025, while travelling on a two-wheeler, he slipped and fell, sustaining fracture of the right ankle, and was advised bed rest for fifty days. Thereafter, on 22.06.2025, he was affected with dengue fever and confined to the house for another 2-3 weeks. These unforeseen health circumstances disrupted his regular routine, and in the process of going to the counsel's office for signing th

10. The Ld. CIT-DR for the revenue Shri Badicala Yadagiri, on the other hand, supporting the order of Ld. CIT(A), submitted that, the assessee could not explain the reasons for the delay in filing of the appeal by filing an application for condoning the delay, even though the Ld. CIT(A) provided sufficient opportunity of hearing, which

THE MUNDLAPADU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,MUNDLAPADU VILLAGE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.250/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) The Mundlapadu Primary Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Credit Ward-1(3), Society Limited, Mundlapadu Vijayawada. Village & Post, Penuganchiprolu Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh – 521190. Pan: Aacat7977J (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Smt. A. Aruna, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15/07/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 25/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

condone the delay of 06 days in 3 filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is a Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited. As per the information available with the Department, the assessee has deposited cash

ST. MARYS ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL SOCIETY,NARASARAOPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION WARD), GUNTUR

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.484 & 485/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) St. Marys English Medium School Society V. Ito (Exemption) Income Tax Office Main Road, Ravipadu Village Lakshmipuram Main Road Narasaraopet Mandal Guntur – 522006 Narasaraopet – 522604, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aakts3349C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act, preferred to file the appeal before Ld.CIT(A). The appeal was filed before Ld. CIT(A) on 28.02.2022 with a delay of 2513 days. The Ld. CIT(A) while considering the condonation of delay petition filed by the assessee concluded that reasons submitted by the assessee do not justify the delay

ST. MARYS ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL SOCIETY,NARASARAOPET vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, (EXEMPTION WARD), GUNTUR

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

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.484 & 485/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15) St. Marys English Medium School Society V. Ito (Exemption) Income Tax Office Main Road, Ravipadu Village Lakshmipuram Main Road Narasaraopet Mandal Guntur – 522006 Narasaraopet – 522604, Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aakts3349C] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

section 10(23C)(iiiad) of the Act, preferred to file the appeal before Ld.CIT(A). The appeal was filed before Ld. CIT(A) on 28.02.2022 with a delay of 2513 days. The Ld. CIT(A) while considering the condonation of delay petition filed by the assessee concluded that reasons submitted by the assessee do not justify the delay

SREE ANANTALAKSHMI TEXTILES PVT LTD,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, TDS WARD-1, ELURU

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

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.402/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2020-21) Sree Anantalakshmi Textiles (P) Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer – Tds Ward-1 C/O. Nsl Textiles Limited Income Tax Office, Kks Towers Engee House, 3Rd Floor, 4Th Line R.R. Pet, Eluru – 534002 Chadramouli Nagar, Guntur – 522007 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aadcs1442E] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Gvn Hari, Advocate : Dr. Aparna Villuri,Sr.Ar राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2025

section 250(6) of the Act. Page. No 5 I.T.A.No.402/VIZ/2025 Sree Anantalakshmi Textiles (P) Ltd., 9. Per contra, Ld. Departmental Representative [hereinafter in short “Ld.DR”] strongly placed reliance on the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in rejecting the condonation petition. Ld. DR strongly opposed for condonation of delay. 10

SYED IRFAN HAZARI,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), GUNTUR

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

Bench: Us:

10 Syed Irfan Hazari declining of the condonation of delay of 166 days by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, had observed that a justice oriented and liberal approach should be adopted while considering the application filed by an appellant seeking condonation of the delay in filing the appeal. We thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, condone

THE KRISHNA DISTRICT MILK PRODUCERS MUTUALLY AIDED CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), , VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

5. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The law is well settled by the Higher Courts that while dealing with the application for condonation of delay, the Court is to see the conduct of the party and plausible reasoning for non filing of the statutory appeal within time. The primary function of a court

THE KRISHNA DISTRICT MILK PRODUCERS MUTUALLY AIDED CO-OPERATIVE UNION LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, , VIJAYAWADA

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon'Ble

5. Heard the parties and perused the material available on record. The law is well settled by the Higher Courts that while dealing with the application for condonation of delay, the Court is to see the conduct of the party and plausible reasoning for non filing of the statutory appeal within time. The primary function of a court

BAYYE CHANDRA KUMAR,WEST GODAVARI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, RAJAHMUNDRY

Bench: Us:

10. Per contra, Dr. Aparna Villuri, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (for short “Ld. DR”) vehemently objected to the seeking of the condonation of the delay involved in the present appeal filed by the assessee. The Ld. DR submitted that as the delay involved in the present appeal was inordinate and the assessee had failed to come forth with

THE KONAYAPALEM PACS LTD.,CHANDARLAPADU MANDAL vs. ITO, WARD-1(3), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.126/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) The Konayapalem Primary Vs. Income Tax Officer, Agricultural Cooperative Credit Ward-(3), Society Limited, Konayapalem Vijayawada. Village, Chandarlapadu Mandal, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh – 521182. Pan: Aacat 6987 G (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Asrss Siva Prasad, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

condone the delay of 97 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee is Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Ltd [PACS]. During the AY 2017-18, as per the information available with the Department

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals (I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together

10,994/- charged U/s. 234E of the Act. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the interest of Rs. 35,031/- charged U/s. 220(2) of the Act. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals (I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together

10,994/- charged U/s. 234E of the Act. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the interest of Rs. 35,031/- charged U/s. 220(2) of the Act. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that

SUPERINTENDENT OF JAILS CENTRAL PRISION,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals (I

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Ays: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) Superintendent Of Jails, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Central Prison, Tds Ward-1, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aaags 7227 N (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Gvn Hari प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 27/04/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 11/05/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan: The Captioned Appeals (I.T.A. No.194, 195 & 196/Viz/2021) Are Filed By The Assessee Against The Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Separate Orders Dated 17/03/2021 For The Ays 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16. Since The Issues Involved In All The Appeals Are Identical, For The Sake Of Convenience, These Appeals Are Clubbed, Heard Together

10,994/- charged U/s. 234E of the Act. 5. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have deleted the interest of Rs. 35,031/- charged U/s. 220(2) of the Act. 6. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing.” 3. The brief facts of the case are that