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.

88 results for “condonation of delay”+ Set Off of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai910Mumbai865Kolkata574Delhi476Pune394Hyderabad314Bangalore284Ahmedabad280Jaipur223Chandigarh181Cochin106Cuttack98Surat93Lucknow91Visakhapatnam88Karnataka88Raipur80Indore76Nagpur55Amritsar53Calcutta44Rajkot39Patna35Jodhpur24SC23Guwahati19Telangana17Allahabad14Panaji12Agra10Varanasi9Dehradun8Ranchi5Rajasthan5Jabalpur4Orissa2Andhra Pradesh2Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Addition to Income55Section 143(3)54Section 143(1)45Condonation of Delay35Deduction30Section 26322Section 80P21Section 143(2)20Section 147

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, GUNTUR vs. ANDHRA TRADE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED, GUNTUR

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the cross objection filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 434/VIZ/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam05 May 2021AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K.S. Rajendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 250(6)Section 50

set off of losses and the department did not place any other decision of the superior Court to controvert the decision relied upon by the ld. CIT(A) cited supra. Therefore, the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal against the Revenue, hence, we find no reason to interfere with the order

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

Showing 1–20 of 88 · Page 1 of 5

20
Section 139(1)20
Section 142(1)19
Disallowance16

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

set a precedent where taxpayers ignore statutory timelines and later seek condonation of delay without giving any reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay. 2.3 There is a statutory limit prescribed for filing of appeal in the Act. The invocation of the power to condone any delay, major or minor, in observing such time limit is possible only

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

loss of Rs.2,20,13,789/- on 21.10.2020 for the A.Y.2020-21. As per the Form-3CD filed for the A.Y. 2020-21 the statutory auditor of the Company has certified that the following payments were made by the assessee company on which tax at source was not deducted as per provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Amount

NARAYANA REDDY ENTERPRISES,,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1,, KAKINADA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 165/VIZ/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam07 Dec 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. Narayana Reddy Enterprises, Vs. Ito, Ward-1, D.No. 34-16-38, Cinema Road, Kakinada. Mandapeta, Kakinada, East Godavari District. Pan No. Aabfn 8259 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Suman Malik – Sr.DR
Section 271(1)(c)

loss and injustice and requested that delay may be condoned. 3. On the other hand, ld. Departmental Representative seriously opposed and submitted that delay is extraordinary; therefore, petition for condonation of delay may be dismissed. 4. We have heard both the parties, perused the affidavit and medical certificate issued by the Doctor. We find that the assessee has failed

M/S. vs. R INFOTECH ,,VISAKHAPATNAMVS.THE ITO ,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 374/VIZ/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 5. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act originally on 30.8.2010 accepting the income returned. The assessee filed return of income admitting total income of ` 2,50,220/- on 29.8.2008. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 148 of the Act on 29.2.2012 for verification

M/S. vs. R INFOTECH ,,VISAKHAPATNAMVS.THE ITO ,, VISAKHAPATNAM

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 373/VIZ/2016[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2018AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AR
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 5. In this case, the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) of the Act originally on 30.8.2010 accepting the income returned. The assessee filed return of income admitting total income of ` 2,50,220/- on 29.8.2008. Subsequently, the assessment was reopened u/s 148 of the Act on 29.2.2012 for verification

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

ITA 42/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

loss of time, had taken the necessary steps, and filed the present appeal on 23.01.2025, which by the time involved a delay of 516 days. 6 Bayye Chandra Kumar 9. The Ld. AR, based on the aforesaid facts of that had resulted to the delay involved in the present appeal filed before the Tribunal, submitted, that as the same

SREERAMULU PENTAKOTA,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3), VISAKHAPATNAM

ITA 555/VIZ/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara, Hon’Ble

Section 143(1)

set-off of carry forward loss was disallowed to the extent of Page. No 2 I.T.A.No.555/VIZ/2025 Sreeramulu Pentakota Rs.2,36,32,250/- in the intimation issued by the A.O/CPC under section 143(1) of the Act dated 29.12.2020. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the CIT(A). Ostensibly, as the assessee, despite having been offered

THE SALURU GIRIJAN CO OP MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED,SALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 117/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 144Section 249(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(f)

loss of time had thereafter taken necessary steps and assailed the order passed by the A.O. u/s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 06.09.2022, before the CIT(A) which, however, by that time involved a delay of 344 days. The Ld. AR submitted that as the delay involved in filing the appeal had occasioned for bona fide reasons, therefore

THE SALUR GIRIJAN CO OP MARKETING SOCIETY LIMITED,VIZIANAGARAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, VIZIANAGARAM

In the result, the appeal of the assessee society is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 118/VIZ/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 144Section 249(3)Section 270ASection 80P(2)(f)

loss of time had thereafter taken necessary steps and assailed the order passed by the A.O. u/s 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act, dated 06.09.2022, before the CIT(A) which, however, by that time involved a delay of 344 days. The Ld. AR submitted that as the delay involved in filing the appeal had occasioned for bona fide reasons, therefore

TIRUMALASETTY NAGARAJU,GUNTUR vs. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),, GUNTUR

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

ITA 190/VIZ/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam02 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Ble(Through Hybrid Hearing) आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No. 190/Viz/2025 (निर्गारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Tirumalasetty Nagaraju, V. Income Tax Officer, Guntur. Ward-1(1), Guntur. Pan: Aeupn1070R (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 263

loss of Rs. 14,70,349/-. The return was processed U/s. 143(1) of the Act on 19/07/2014 and thereafter the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS to examine the various business aspects. Accordingly, the assessment was completed U/s. 143(3) of the Act on 29/01/2015 by estimating the income from wine business @ 5% on the cost of goods

ACIT, (EXEMPTIONS), EXEMPTIONS CIRCLE,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNI,

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

ITA 382/VIZ/2017[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Satyanandam, DR
Section 10Section 11Section 133ASection 2(24)

delay is condoned and the cross objections are admitted. M/s. Sri Prakash Educational Society, Tuni 11. Ground No.4 in respect of cross objection in all the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12 is related to the disallowance of notional interest. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer found that the assessee had advanced the sums

ACIT,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY, TUNI

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

ITA 465/VIZ/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Satyanandam, DR
Section 10Section 11Section 133ASection 2(24)

delay is condoned and the cross objections are admitted. M/s. Sri Prakash Educational Society, Tuni 11. Ground No.4 in respect of cross objection in all the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12 is related to the disallowance of notional interest. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer found that the assessee had advanced the sums

ACIT, EXEMPTIONS,, VIJAYAWADA vs. SRI PRAKASHA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,, TUNII

In the result, all the appeals filed by the revenue for the

ITA 467/VIZ/2017[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam14 Mar 2018AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh

For Appellant: Shri T. Satyanandam, DR
Section 10Section 11Section 133ASection 2(24)

delay is condoned and the cross objections are admitted. M/s. Sri Prakash Educational Society, Tuni 11. Ground No.4 in respect of cross objection in all the appeals for the assessment years 2008-09 to 2011-12 is related to the disallowance of notional interest. During the assessment proceedings, the assessing officer found that the assessee had advanced the sums

KVC INFRASTRUCTURES,VISAKHAPATNAM vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 266/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 124(3)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 249(3)Section 282Section 44A

loss of time filed the appeal with the CIT(A) on 20.02.2020, which by the time involved a delay of 26 days. The Ld.AR submitted that though the delay of 26 days involved in filing of the appeal before the CIT(A) had crept in because of the bonafide reasons and not on account of any lackadaisical approach

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE MAHARAJA CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 454/VIZ/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Dec 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. The Maharaja Co-Operative Circle-1(1) Urban Bank Ltd Visakhapatnam D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No. 146/Viz/2019 & 147/Viz/2019 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively) The Maharaja Co-Operative Urban Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Bank Ltd Income Tax D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Circle-1(1) Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 40

condoning the delay. Hence, the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed in limine. 2. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-1, Visakhapatnam in I.T.A. No.10380/2016-17/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 and 10151/2017- 18/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 dated 29.01.2019 for the Assessment Year

THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(1),, VISAKHAPATNAM vs. THE MAHARAJA CO-OPERATIVE URBAN BANK LIMITED, VISAKHAPATNAM

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

ITA 453/VIZ/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam18 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao& Shri D.S. Sunder Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. The Maharaja Co-Operative Circle-1(1) Urban Bank Ltd Visakhapatnam D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No. 146/Viz/2019 & 147/Viz/2019 Arising Out Of I.T.A.No.453/Viz/2019 & 454/Viz/2019) (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year : 2014-15 & 2015-16 Respectively) The Maharaja Co-Operative Urban Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Bank Ltd Income Tax D.No.49-9-14, Dwaraka Nagar Circle-1(1) Ganta Arcade Visakhapatnam Visakhapatnam [Pan : Aaaat4196K] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri D.K.Sonowal, Cit, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओर से / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2019

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri D.K.Sonowal, CIT, DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 194ASection 40

condoning the delay. Hence, the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed in limine. 2. These appeals are filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]-1, Visakhapatnam in I.T.A. No.10380/2016-17/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 and 10151/2017- 18/AC,C-1(1),VSP/2018-19 dated 29.01.2019 for the Assessment Year

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

loss and severe hardship in case the delay of 33 days in filing the appeal has not been condoned. C.O.No. 154/VIZ/2019 (Aharief Azizulla) 3. Ld.AR did not refute the claim of the Revenue Department. 4. Having considered the contentions and submissions of the Revenue Department to the effect that Pr.CIT-1, Visakhapatnam is also holding the charge of two divisions

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

Appeal is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 135/VIZ/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 250

setting aside the order of the Hon'ble High Court of 5 Ganesh Kumar Paidi Chhattisgarh, which had approved the declining of the condonation of delay of 114 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

NATA RAJA TRADERS,GUNTUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), GUNTUR

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

ITA 270/VIZ/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 Aug 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.270/Viz/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2022-23) Nata Raja Traders, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Guntur. Ward-1(1), Pan: Aaefn2642P Guntur. (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 : 14/08/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of : 23/08/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna, ARFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 143(1)Section 194QSection 249(2)

Loss Account as income. While making payments, the exporters / buyers / traders have applied the provisions of section 194Q of the Act and 194A of the Act for delayed payments, if any. The assessee had mentioned these details in column 14(IV) of the P & L Account. However, while processing the assessee’s return of income, the Ld. AO / CPC disallowed