28 in UOI v. Jahangir Behramjee Jeejeebhoy

2024 INSC 262Supreme Court of India2024#15257 most cited
6

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 248rectification u/s 154section 249(2)section 51section 249delay in filing appealsection 80p(2)(d)service of noticesection 80psection 24commissioner (appeals)section 154

Judgments citing 28 in UOI v. Jahangir Behramjee Jeejeebhoy

Sarnath Co-Op Housing Society Ltd, Desai Road vs. CIT (Appeal), Piramal Chamber

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

ITA 3207/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 143(1)Section 250

…ch case and that, the expression 'sufficient cause' cannot be found if negligence, inaction or lack of bona fides is attributed to the party. 3.3 More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr vs Jahangir Byramji Jeejeeboy [2024] 2024 INSC 262 dealt at length on the matter of condonation of delay of appeals. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that once it is held that a party has lost his right to have the matter considered on merits because of his own inaction for long, delay cannot be presumed to be non-deliberate and thus, he cannot be heard to plead that the substantial justice deser…

Sarnath Co-Op Housing Society Ltd, Mumbai vs. CIT(A), Mumbai

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

ITA 2550/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan1. Ita No. 2548/Mum/2025 (A.Y: 2013-14) 2. Ita No. 2549/Mum/2025 (A.Y: 2015-16) 3. Ita No. 2550/Mum/2025 (A.Y: 2020-21) Sarnath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. 59-B, Sarnath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Breach Candy, Mumbai-400 026 Pan: Aaaas3230K Ito Ward 15(1)(4), Vs. Mumbai. (Appellant) Assessee Represented By Department Represented By Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : : : : (Respondent) Shri Pawan Choudhary, Ld. Ar Shri Pravin Salunkhe (Sr. Dr.) 02.07.2025 16.07.2025 Order Per Raj Kumar Chauhan (J.M.): 1. These Appeals Are Filed By The Appellant/Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 27.02.2025 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/Jcit (A)-4, Hyderabad [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)"], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act"] For The A.Y. 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2020-21 Respectively, Wherein The Appeals Of The Assessee Are Dismissed Being Barred By Limitation & The Ld. Cit(A) Has Refused To Condone The Delay Stating That The Assessee Has Failed To Show Sufficient Cause For Condonation Of Delay. 2. Since The Facts Of All The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Exactly Same, Parties Are Same, Also The Order Of The Same Date & The Matter Involved Is Also Similar Wherein The Assessee Has Challenged The Disallowance Of Interest Amount Earned From Deposit Of Interest With The Cooperative Banks & Was Claimed As Deduction U/S 80P(2)(D) Of The Act For The Different

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…ch case and that, the expression 'sufficient cause' cannot be found if negligence, inaction or lack of bona fides is attributed to the party. 3.3 More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr us Jahangir Byramji Jeejeeboy [2024] 2024 INSC 262 dealt at length on the matter of condonation of delay of appeals. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that once it is held that a party has lost his right to have the matter considered on merits because of his own inaction for long, delay cannot be presumed to be non- deliberate and thus, he cannot be heard to plead that the substantial justice dese…

Sarnath Co-Operative Housing Society Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT(A), Mumbai

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

ITA 2549/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…ch case and that, the expression 'sufficient cause' cannot be found if negligence, inaction or lack of bona fides is attributed to the party. 3.3 More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr us Jahangir Byramji Jeejeeboy [2024] 2024 INSC 262 dealt at length on the matter of condonation of delay of appeals. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that once it is held that a party has lost his right to have the matter considered on merits because of his own inaction for long, delay cannot be presumed to be non- deliberate and thus, he cannot be heard to plead that the substantial justice dese…

Sarnath Co-Op Housing Society Ltd, Bhulabhai Desai vs. CIT(Appeal), Piramal Chamber

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

ITA 2548/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri. Raj Kumar Chauhan1. Ita No. 2548/Mum/2025 (A.Y: 2013-14) 2. Ita No. 2549/Mum/2025 (A.Y: 2015-16) 3. Ita No. 2550/Mum/2025 (A.Y: 2020-21) Sarnath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. 59-B, Sarnath Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd, Bhulabhai Desai Road, Breach Candy, Mumbai-400 026 Pan: Aaaas3230K Ito Ward 15(1)(4), Vs. Mumbai. (Appellant) Assessee Represented By Department Represented By Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement (Respondent) Shri Pawan Choudhary, Ld. Ar Shri Pravin Salunkhe (Sr. Dr.) 02.07.2025 16.07.2025 Order Per Raj Kumar Chauhan (J.M.): 1. These Appeals Are Filed By The Appellant/Assessee Against The Separate Orders Dated 27.02.2025 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/Jcit (A)-4, Hyderabad [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)"], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act"] For The A.Y. 2013-14, 2015-16 & 2020-21 Respectively, Wherein The Appeals Of The Assessee Are Dismissed Being Barred By Limitation & The Ld. Cit(A) Has Refused To Condone The Delay Stating That The Assessee Has Failed To Show Sufficient Cause For Condonation Of Delay. 2. Since The Facts Of All The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Exactly Same, Parties Are Same, Also The Order Of The Same Date & The Matter Involved Is Also Similar Wherein The Assessee Has Challenged The Disallowance Of Interest Amount Earned From Deposit Of Interest With The Cooperative Banks & Was Claimed As Deduction U/S 80P(2)(D) Of The Act For The Different

Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

…ch case and that, the expression 'sufficient cause' cannot be found if negligence, inaction or lack of bona fides is attributed to the party. 3.3 More recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr us Jahangir Byramji Jeejeeboy [2024] 2024 INSC 262 dealt at length on the matter of condonation of delay of appeals. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that once it is held that a party has lost his right to have the matter considered on merits because of his own inaction for long, delay cannot be presumed to be non- deliberate and thus, he cannot be heard to plead that the substantial justice dese…

Institute of Nephrourology, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemptions Circle - 01, Unity Building Annexe

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and restored to the file of the ld

ITA 337/BANG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Shreesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

…he case of A B Govardhan v P Ragothaman, (2024) 10 SCC 613 in para 4, the concept of liberal approach subserving the cause of justice was employed to condone the delay. 20. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 28 in UOI v. Jahangir Behramjee Jeejeebhoy 2024 INSC 262 has held that the Court owes a duty to first ascertain the bonafides of the explanation offered by the party seeking condonation and then if sufficient cause is assigned, then the delay must be condoned. 21. In the present case, there is no doubt about the bonafides of the assessee in showing a sufficient cause. 22. The Hon’ble Supreme Court…

Institute of Nephrourology, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption Circle 1, Unity Building

The appeals of the assessee are allowed and restored to the file of the ld

ITA 336/BANG/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore03 Jul 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Shreesh Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Balusamy N., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 234BSection 250

…he case of A B Govardhan v P Ragothaman, (2024) 10 SCC 613 in para 4, the concept of liberal approach subserving the cause of justice was employed to condone the delay. 20. Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in para 28 in UOI v. Jahangir Behramjee Jeejeebhoy 2024 INSC 262 has held that the Court owes a duty to first ascertain the bonafides of the explanation offered by the party seeking condonation and then if sufficient cause is assigned, then the delay must be condoned. 21. In the present case, there is no doubt about the bonafides of the assessee in showing a sufficient cause. 22. The Hon’ble Supreme Court…

28 in UOI v. Jahangir Behramjee Jeejeebhoy (2024 INSC 262) — Cited in 6 Judgments | BharatTax