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.

54 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 40clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai820Mumbai721Delhi700Kolkata483Bangalore272Ahmedabad250Hyderabad240Jaipur215Pune170Karnataka148Nagpur99Surat96Chandigarh95Raipur84Indore77Amritsar59Cochin55Visakhapatnam54Lucknow50Calcutta48Cuttack44Rajkot43Panaji36Patna28SC27Telangana21Varanasi14Allahabad12Jodhpur10Dehradun9Guwahati8Jabalpur8Orissa5Rajasthan5Agra4Ranchi3Andhra Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1Gauhati1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)39Section 143(3)35Addition to Income29Condonation of Delay27Section 13226Section 142(1)21Deduction21Section 143(2)17Section 147

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

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

ITA 551/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, for non-deduction of TDS, and additions towards difference in net profit declared for the assessment year 2015-16 and assessment year 2017-18 for Rs.4,23,755/-. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), and such appeal was filed on 08.10.2024 with

Showing 1–20 of 54 · Page 1 of 3

16
Section 14815
Section 139(1)14
Cash Deposit10

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

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

ITA 552/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 270ASection 40

Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, for non-deduction of TDS, and additions towards difference in net profit declared for the assessment year 2015-16 and assessment year 2017-18 for Rs.4,23,755/-. 4. Aggrieved by the assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), and such appeal was filed on 08.10.2024 with

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

ITA 494/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 194JSection 44A

40,509/-, the same was determined by the AO/CPC, Bangalore at Rs. 27,57,118/-. 7. I find that the assessee aggrieved with the order of AO/CPC, Bangalore, passed under section 143(1) dated 11.01.2019, had carried the matter in appeal before CIT(A), who declined to condone the inordinate 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

ITA 402/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

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 201(1)Section 40

condone the delay of 20 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits in the following paragraphs. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing of cotton yarn and filed its original return of income declaring a total loss

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

ITA 305/VIZ/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Us:

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 44A

condone the delay of 32 days in filing the appeal. 3. Any other ground that may be urged at the time of appeal hearing. 3. Succinctly stated, the A.O., based on information received from the Income Tax Officer (Investigation), Unit–4, Vijayawada, vide his letter dated 04.02.2019, observed that the assessee had made cash deposits

PADMADEVI BHANSALI,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOMETAX OFFICER, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 520/VIZ/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K.Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No.520/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2020-21) Padma Devi Bhansali Vs. Income Tax Officer Vizianagaram Vizianagaram [Pan : Aevpb1105N] अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Y.A.Rao, Ar रधजस्‍व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr.Aparna Villuri, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Y.A.Rao, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 154

section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) dated 25.08.2022 with the delay of 40 days. The learned CIT(A) passed the impugned order, rejecting the appeal on the grounds of delay in filing of the appeal by 40 days and did not condone

THE VAZRAPUKOTTURU PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,SRIKAKULAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, SRIKAKULAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 439/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Chary, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.439/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2018-19) The Vazrapukotturu Primary V. Ito – Ward – 1 Income Tax Office, Aaykar Bhavan Agricultural Cooperative Credit Palakonda Road, Srikakulam – 532001 Society Limited Andhra Pradesh D.No. 12-3-71, Gandhi Nagar Kasibugga, Palasa, Srikakulam [Pan: Aadat1897J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 80P

40,060/- claimed by the assessee under section 80P of the Act in the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Act. 8. In this connection, at the outset, Ld. Authorised Representative [hereinafter “Ld.AR”] submitted that the assessee has filed the condonation of Page No. 4 I.T.A.No.439/VIZ/2024 The Vazrapukotturu Primary Agricultural Cooperative Credit Society Limited delay

POTLURI VENKATA NAGESWARA RAO,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 191/VIZ/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Jul 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.191/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Potluri Venkata Nageswara Rao Vs. Income Tax Officer, (Huf), Ward-2(4), Vijayawada. Vijayawada. Pan: Aaohp 2167 F (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri C. Subrahmanyam प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/06/2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of : 08/07/2022 Pronouncement O R D E R Per S. Balakrishnan:

For Appellant: Sri C. SubrahmanyamFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 143(3)Section 5Section 54F

section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, any appeal or any application, ……………..may be admitted after the prescribed period, if the appellant or the applicant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal or making the application within such period. It implies that the delay of each day needs to be justified and there must

ANJAN DASGUPTA,GURGAON vs. DCIT, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 218/VIZ/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam04 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 218/Viz/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17) Anjan Dasgupta, Vs. Dcit, Gurgaon. Circle-1(1), Pan: Afspd0589G Guntur. (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Nitin Gulati, Advocate ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Sri Nitin Gulati, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 246A(1)(a)Section 249(2)

condonation of delay is rejected as the same is not maintainable in view of the provisions of section 249(2) of the Act. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(A)-3, Ahmedabad, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds of appeal: 3 Anjan Dasgupta vs. DCIT “1. That the appellant

SRI GURU RAJENDRA SURI JAIN ARADHANA BHAVAN TRUST,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), GUNTUR

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

ITA 7/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam27 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.7/Viz/2025

Section 12A

section 12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). 2. At the outset, it is noticed from the appeal record that there is a delay of 40 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Explaining the reasons for belated filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drew our attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1), , RAJAHMUNDRY vs. K.VENKATA RAJU, RAJAHMUNDRY

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

ITA 501/VIZ/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.501/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) Asst.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.Venkata Raju Circle-2(1) D.No.2-59, Vemagiri Rajahmundry Kadiam Mandal Rajahmundry [Pan : Aabfk4007A] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Co No.153/Viz/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No.501/Viz/2019) (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S K.Venkata Raju Vs. Asst.Commissioner Of Income D.No.2-59, Vemagiri Tax Kadiam Mandal Circle-2(1) Rajahmundry Rajahmundry [Pan : Aabfk4007A] अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri S.P.G.Mudaliar, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2022 घोषणध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 07.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Balakrishnan Scondonation Of Delay :

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.P.G.Mudaliar, DR
Section 131Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 44A

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 2. The revenue raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A), Rajahmundry is erroneous on facts and in law. 2. The CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow depreciation from the net profit estimated from contractual receipt. 3. The CIT(A) ought to have

BOMBAY GASLIGHT STORES,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. DCIT ,ACIT, CIRCLE 3(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 55/VIZ/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jun 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.55/Viz/2024 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Bombay Gaslight Stores Vs. Dcit/Acit 10-1-27/A, Asilmetta Circle-3(1) Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaab0207B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sreekar Vedula, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 143(1)Section 40

40(b)(iv) of the Act in respect of interest and remuneration paid to the partners and made addition of the same. 4. Aggrieved by the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) with the delay of 1008 days and filed condonation petition. Relying on various judicial precedents, the 3 I.T.A

SRI KRISHNA GENERAL TRADING COMPANY,PONNURU vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ELURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 614/VIZ/2019[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Apr 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./ I.T.A. No.614/Viz/2019 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-14) Sri Krishna General Trading Vs. Income Tax Officer, Company, Ward-1, Ponnuru, Guntur Dist. Bapatla. Pan: Aaifs 3783 L (अऩीऱधथी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/ Respondent) अऩीऱधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : None प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Sri Spg Mudaliar, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sri SPG Mudaliar, Sr. AR
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 263Section 40

40(a)(ia) of the IT Act, 1961 as per directions of Pr. CIT under section 263 on objections raised by Audit party. The Ld. AO ought not to have concluded, without considering the appellant’s plea. 3. Any other ground may be sought at the time of hearing of appeal.” 3. At the outset, it appears from the order

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. SHARIEF AZIZULLA,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue Department and the cross objection filed by the Assessee stands dismissed

ITA 449/VIZ/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam13 May 2021AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri N. Gopi Krishan, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)Section 44A

delay stands condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 5. Now coming to the merits of the case. Having heard the parties and perused the material available on record. Facts are already illustrated/narrated by the ld. Commissioner in its order, hence, for the sake of brevity not being repeated herein. 5.1. The Revenue Department has raised the following grounds

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

BALABHADRA VENKATARAJU,RAJAHMUNDRY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (HQRS-1), VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 251/VIZ/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam08 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अऩीऱ सं./I.T.A.No.251/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15) Balabhadra Venkatraju Vs. Income Tax Officer (Hqrs-1) 10-7-5, Rangreezpeta Visakhapatnam Rajahmundry [Pan : Aaahv6735P] (अपीऱार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT (DR)
Section 119(2)Section 130(1)Section 139(4)

condonation of delay observing as under : “5. From the perusal of the AO’s report and the petition, it is clear that the assessee has ample time to engage another accountant to finalize his accounts and file the return of income within due date as the accountant, who was stated to be sick, was under treatment from

JAIN BABULAL CHAMPATLAL,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are 9

ITA 400/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.400 & 401/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Vs. Jain Babulal Champatlal Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex 40-1-155, Lgf Mg Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aefpc1220F]

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 57

40-1-155, LGF MG Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [PAN:AEFPC1220F] करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented by : Shri ASRSS Siva Prasad, CA राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented by : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.AR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 04.11.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2025 आदेश

JAIN BABULAL CHAMPATLAL,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are 9

ITA 401/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.400 & 401/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year:2018-19) Vs. Jain Babulal Champatlal Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex 40-1-155, Lgf Mg Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aefpc1220F]

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 57

40-1-155, LGF MG Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [PAN:AEFPC1220F] करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented by : Shri ASRSS Siva Prasad, CA राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented by : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.AR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 04.11.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2025 आदेश

JAIN BABULAL CHAMPATLAL,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are 9

ITA 394/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.394 & 395/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Vs. Jain Babulal Champatlal Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex 40-1-155, Lgf Mg Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aefpc1220F]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 57

40-1-155, LGF MG Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [PAN:AEFPC1220F] करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented by : Shri ASRSS Siva Prasad, CA राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented by : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.AR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 03.11.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2025 आदेश

JAIN BABULAL CHAMPATLAL,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are 9

ITA 395/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.394 & 395/Viz/2025 (निर्धारणवर्ा/ Assessment Year:2017-18) Vs. Jain Babulal Champatlal Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex 40-1-155, Lgf Mg Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aefpc1220F]

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 57

40-1-155, LGF MG Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Ripples Mall, M.G. Road Andhra Pradesh Vijayawada-520010 Andhra Pradesh [PAN:AEFPC1220F] करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented by : Shri ASRSS Siva Prasad, CA राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented by : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr.AR सुिवाई समाप्त होिे की ततति/ Date of Conclusion of Hearing : 03.11.2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07.11.2025 आदेश