Search: condonation of delay

3 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 53Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Raipur38 Bangalore23 Chennai18 Mumbai16 Patna7 Kolkata7 Delhi5 Hyderabad5 Pune4 Visakhapatnam3 Chandigarh3 Amritsar2 Indore2 SC2 Ahmedabad2 Telangana1 Calcutta1 Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)5 Section 2633 Capital Gains3 Section 54F2 Condonation of Delay2 Long Term Capital Gains2 Addition to Income2

KONDA VENKATESWARA REDDY,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, VIJAYAWADA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 146/VIZ/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.146/Viz/2020 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17) Konda Venkateswara Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer D.No.44-15-97 Ward-3(3) Lenin Nagar, Gunadala Vijayawada Vijayawada [Pan : Akmpv9138J] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Karthik Manickam, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 11.04.2022 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 29.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Condonation Of Delay : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Vijayawada Dated 10.02.2020 With The Delay Of 34 Days For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2016-17. The Assessee Filed Petition For Condonation Of Delay, Stating That The Delay Was Due To Covid-19 Pandemic & Lockdown Declared By The State Government. There Was No Malafide Intention In Filing The Appeal

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Karthik Manickam, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 148

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual, did not file his return of income for the A.Y.2016-17 u/s 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘Act’). Based on the information available on record, it was noticed by the Assessing Officer (AO) that the assessee

KONDA VENKATESWARA REDDY,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, VIJAYAWADA

KONDA VENKATESWARA REDDY,,VIJAYAWADA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(3),, VIJAYAWADA

SIRIPURAPU VENKATA RAMANA RAO,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), VISAKHAPATNAM

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1), VIJAYAWADA vs. SIVA JYOTHI PALAM, VIJAYAWADA