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.

10 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 69Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai158Kolkata109Delhi85Jaipur48Ahmedabad45Chennai44Amritsar34Surat33Bangalore20Pune17Hyderabad16Chandigarh16Lucknow12Visakhapatnam10Rajkot9Indore8Raipur8Cochin5Calcutta5Guwahati4Dehradun3SC2Jabalpur1Agra1Jodhpur1Nagpur1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 14710Section 143(3)7Section 148A7Addition to Income7Section 142(1)6Section 1486Section 2505Section 69A5Cash Deposit

SRILAKSHMI DEVIREDDY,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(5), VIJAYAWADA

ITA 428/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
Section 139(4)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

condone the delay of 161 days involved in filing the present appeal by the\nassessee before the Tribunal.\n10. Coming to the merits of the case, I find that as the assessee had failed to come\nforth with any explanation regarding the source of the cash deposits of Rs. 11,00,000/-\nmade in her bank account, therefore

GANESH KUMAR PAIDI,VIJAYAWADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), VIJAYAWADA

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

5
Condonation of Delay5
Unexplained Money4
Limitation/Time-bar4
ITA 135/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250

condone the delay involved in the filing of the present appeal. 7. Succinctly stated, the assessee had filed his return of income for A.Y. 2017-18 on 31.07.2017, declaring an income of Rs. 7,21,890/-. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny of assessment u/s 143(2) of the Act. 8. During the course of assessment

VALLABHAI PATEL KOTTAPALLI,KRISHNA DIST vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(4), VIJAYAWADA

ITA 372/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam19 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143Section 147Section 250Section 250(6)

condone the delay and proceed to decide the\npresent appeal on merits.\n4.\nIn this appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: -\n\"1.\nThat on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the\norders passed u/s 147 r.w.s.144 02-12-2019 of the IT Act, 1961, dt. 02-12-\n2019, that was confirmed

BABU RAO SAHUKARI,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2 (5), VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 327/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.327/Viz/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Babu Rao Sahukari Vs. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 2(5) 24-107-54/1 Visakhapatnam – 530020 C/O. Srikar Sai Medical Agencies Andhra Pradesh Gonthivanipalem Gajuwaka, Visakhapatnam – 530026 Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Efnps1341E] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri M. Muralidhar, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69ASection 69C

69C of the Act. Page. No 2 I.T.A.No. 327/VIZ/2025 Babu Rao Sahukari 3. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. AO, assessee filed an appeal before Ld.CIT(A). Before Ld. CIT(A), assessee contested the jurisdiction for issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act. Assessee while acknowledging the date of service of the assessment order as 17.03.2023 filed

MURALI KRISHNA KOMMINENI,SRIKAKULAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, SRIKAKULAM

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

ITA 299/VIZ/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam10 Jan 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.299/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Muralikrishna Kommineni Vs. Income Tax Officer 17, Sbi Colony Ward-2 Chinna Bondilipuram Srikakulam Srikakulam [Pan : Bcxpk3244G] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri C.Subrahmanyam, ARFor Respondent: Dr.Aparna Villuri, DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3 I.T.A. No.299/Viz/2023, A.Y.2017-18 Murali Krishna Kommineni, Srikakulam 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee, an individual, doing wholesale Kirana business under the name and style of Sri Sai Deekshitha Enterprises filed his return of income for the A.Y.2017-18 on 29.12.2017, admitting an income of Rs.10

SHAIK SAIDA,NUZVID vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

ITA 338/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271A

condoned the delay of 116 days in filing the appeal for AY 2015-16 due to sufficient and reasonable cause. The Tribunal held that the reassessment proceedings initiated for AY 2015-16 were without jurisdiction as the notice under Section 148 was issued beyond the limitation period. For AY 2018-19, the appeals related to quantum additions and penalty were

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1,, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. PHOZO DIGITAL PRESS PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue as well as the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 5/VIZ/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 May 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.04/Viz/2021& 05/Viz/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Years :2015-16& 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Phozo Digital Press Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax D.No.48-13-18, Bhagavan Castle Central Circle-1 Sri Janakirama Street Visakhapatnam Sri Nagar, Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aagcp7803H]

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

Condonation of Delay The assessee ought to have filed the appeals in this case on or before 27.12.2020. However, the appeals were filed by the assessee on 08.01.2021. Hon’ble Supreme Court has extended the time limit due to corona pandemic by an order M.A.No.665/2021 in SMW(C) No.3/2020 dt.15.07.2020 for the limitation falling during the period between

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, , VISAKHAPATNAM vs. PHOZO DIGITAL PRESS PRIVATE LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue as well as the cross objections filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4/VIZ/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 May 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.04/Viz/2021& 05/Viz/2021 (निर्धारणवर्ा/Assessment Years :2015-16& 2016-17) Asst. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S Phozo Digital Press Pvt. Ltd. Income Tax D.No.48-13-18, Bhagavan Castle Central Circle-1 Sri Janakirama Street Visakhapatnam Sri Nagar, Visakhapatnam [Pan :Aagcp7803H]

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT(DR)
Section 132Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 153A

Condonation of Delay The assessee ought to have filed the appeals in this case on or before 27.12.2020. However, the appeals were filed by the assessee on 08.01.2021. Hon’ble Supreme Court has extended the time limit due to corona pandemic by an order M.A.No.665/2021 in SMW(C) No.3/2020 dt.15.07.2020 for the limitation falling during the period between

SHAIK SAIDA,NUZVID vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 336/VIZ/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: the Tribunal and the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons, similar to the three appeals, which are extracted herein below:

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

condone the delay of 116 days in filing the appeal and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. As per the information available with the Department, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee has deposited cash

SHAIK SAIDA,NUZVID vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(1), VIJAYAWADA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated herein above

ITA 337/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: the Tribunal and the assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the reasons, similar to the three appeals, which are extracted herein below:

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271ASection 69A

condone the delay of 116 days in filing the appeal and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual. As per the information available with the Department, the Ld. AO noticed that the assessee has deposited cash