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.

6 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 236clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka101Chennai85Mumbai81Jaipur45Delhi42Kolkata38Bangalore36Pune36Hyderabad23Ahmedabad17Nagpur14Chandigarh14Lucknow12Indore11Varanasi11Rajkot10Raipur8Allahabad8Visakhapatnam6Guwahati5Cochin5Surat5Cuttack4Amritsar4Jabalpur3Agra3Patna2Calcutta2Andhra Pradesh2Rajasthan1SC1

Key Topics

Section 1478Section 143(3)6Addition to Income6Section 1484Section 403Condonation of Delay3Section 92C2Section 2632Section 40A(3)

AGRI GOLD FOODS AND FARM PRODUCTS LIMITED,VIJAYAWADA vs. ASST.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), VIJAYAWADA

ITA 2000/HYD/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam09 Sept 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Us:

Section 143(3)

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present appeal. 6. Succinctly stated, the assessee company, which is engaged in the business of manufacturing cattle feed and seeds, had filed its return of income for A.Y. 2007-08 on 26.04.2008, declaring a loss of (-) Rs. 1,59,44,684/-. The return of income was initially processed as such

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 260/VIZ/2012[1984-85]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 1984-85

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

2
Deduction2
Bogus Purchases2
Reopening of Assessment2
For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

delay is condoned. 2. The assessee filed appeal raising the following grounds along with Form No.36. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income Tax is not correct in law or on facts in upholding the reopening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act though the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment

SMT. L SUDHA BALA, L/R OF LATE SRI L.NARSA REDDY,GUNTUR vs. THE DCIT, SPECIAL RANGE GUNTUR, GUNTUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 261/VIZ/2012[1985-86]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 1985-86

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.260 & 261/Viz/2012 (धििाारण िर्ा/ Assessment Years :1984-85 & 1985-86 Respectively) L.Sudha Bala Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of L/R Of Late Sri L Narasa Reddy Income Tax Prop.Sri Venkateswara Agro Chemicals Special Range Industries Guntur 2-14-101, Syamala Nagar 2Nd Lane, Guntur [Pan : Acgpl2351P] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Suman Malik, DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40A(3)

delay is condoned. 2. The assessee filed appeal raising the following grounds along with Form No.36. (1) On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Commissioner of Income Tax is not correct in law or on facts in upholding the reopening of the assessment u/s 148 of the Act though the reasons recorded for reopening of assessment

G M CONSTRUCTIONS,,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. CIT, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 508/VIZ/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam03 Jul 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.508/Viz/2017 (ननधधारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2012-13) M/S G.M.Constructions Vs. Commissioner Of Income Tax C/O Sunil Kumar Gautam Visakhapatnam 18-36-1, Kothasalipeta Maharanipeta Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aakfg5978M] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 13.06.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.07.2019 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 263Section 40

condone the delay since the reason explained by the assessee is convincing and genuine. 2. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1 [Pr.CIT]-1, Visakhapatnam vide F.No.Pr.CIT-1/VSP/263/2016-17 dated 27.03.2017 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2012-13. 3. All the grounds of appeal are related to the order

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VIJAYAWADA vs. FYSOLATE TECHNOLOGIES, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 182/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.182/Viz/2023 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Assistant Commissioner Of Vs. Fysolate Technologies, Income Tax, Vijayawada. Vijawayada. Pan: Aacff5633L (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Assessee By : Sri Mithilesh Sannareddy ""याथ" क" ओर से / Revenue By : Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/04/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 15/07/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri Mithilesh SannareddyFor Respondent: Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

condone the delay of 43 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, a firm, based out at VSEZ, Duvvada, Visakhapatnam, is engaged in the manufacturing and export of wide range of herbal extracts, filed

ITO, WARD - 2(4),, VIJAYAWADA vs. APPLE ELEVATORS PRIVATE LIMITED., VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the revenue is partly allowed and cross objection of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 525/VIZ/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Oct 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.525/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2012-13) Income Tax Officer Vs. M/S Apple Elevators Pvt. Ltd., Ward-2(4) D.No.74-26-21, Main Road Vijayawada Near Saibaba Temple Ashok Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aadca6442N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.104/Viz/2019 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.525/Viz/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2012-13) M/S Apple Elevators Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.74-26-21, Main Road Ward-2(4) Near Saibaba Temple Vijayawada Ashok Nagar Vijayawada [Pan : Aadca6442N] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri C.Subrahmanyam, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 21.08.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 04.10.2019

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT DR
Section 68

condonation of delay, hence the cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer (AO) found during the assessment proceedings that the assessee has accepted the advances from customers amounting to Rs.4,98,49,526/- as per Balance Sheet shown under the head ‘current liabilities’ and creditors