Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy

7 SCC 123Supreme Court of India1998#203 most cited

What is Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy authority for?

The Supreme Court outlines the principles for condoning delay in filing appeals, stating that a litigant's lapse is not always a bar if the explanation is bona fide and not a dilatory strategy. Courts should show utmost consideration to suitors and prioritize substantial justice unless the delay is deliberately to gain time.

359

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy · condonation of delay · delay in filing appeal · Section 253(5) · Section 249(3) · Section 253 · Section 249 · Section 250 · reasonable cause · sufficient cause · substantial justice · bona fide explanation

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 253(5)Section 148Section 249(3)Section 5

Issues it is cited on

section 253(5)section 249(3)section 249section 253delay in filing appealcondonation of delaysection 24registration under section 12asection 80g(5)reasonable causesection 80gsection 12ab

Judgments citing Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy

SUKHDEV SINGH,KURUKSHETRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, KURUKSHETRA, KURUKSHETRA

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 1142/CHANDI/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Apr 2026AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1142/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Sukhdev Singh, The Ito, Village-Dheerpur, Ward No. 3, Po-Khanpur Koliyan, Vs Kurukshetra. Tehsil-Thanesar, Kurukshetra. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Etgps8505H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Dhruv Goel, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 15.04.2026 Physical Hearing O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goel, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1142/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Sukhdev Singh, The ITO, Village-Dheerpur, Ward No. 3, PO-Khanpur Koliyan, Vs Kurukshetra. Tehsil-Thanesar, Kurukshetra. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: ETGPS8505H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Dhruv Goel, CA Revenue by : Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 11.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 15.04.2026 PHYSICAL HEARIN…

HEALTH BIOTECH LIIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

ITA 1243/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 249Section 253Section 270ASection 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The DCIT/ACIT, SCO 162-164, IAL Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCH1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing :…

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

ITA 1242/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 249Section 253Section 270ASection 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The DCIT/ACIT, SCO 162-164, IAL Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCH1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing :…

HEALTH BIOTECH LIMITED ,CHANDIGARH vs. DCIT/ACIT CIR1(1), CHANDIGARH

ITA 1241/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The Dcit/Acit, Sco 162-164, Ial Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabch1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.04.2026

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 249Section 253Section 270ASection 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘A’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1241, 1242 & 1243/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2016-17, 2017-18 & 2017-18 Health Biotech Limited, The DCIT/ACIT, SCO 162-164, IAL Building, Vs Circle 1(1),Sector 17-E, Sector 34, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABCH1876K अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing :…

HAJIMOHMADSAFI ABDULREHMAN SHAIKH,VADODARA vs. DEPUTY COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 2420/AHD/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…ch should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay so as to advance substantial justice, and that technical considerations should not come in the way of adjudication on merits. Similarly, in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that length of delay is immaterial so long as the explanation is satisfactory and the delay is not attributable to mala fide intention. 30. In the present case, the assessee has demonstrated that he was suffering from serious and life-threatening medical conditions over a prolonged period, which significantly impair…

HAJIMOHMADSAFI ABDULREHMAN SHAIKH,VADODARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 2413/AHD/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…ch should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay so as to advance substantial justice, and that technical considerations should not come in the way of adjudication on merits. Similarly, in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that length of delay is immaterial so long as the explanation is satisfactory and the delay is not attributable to mala fide intention. 30. In the present case, the assessee has demonstrated that he was suffering from serious and life-threatening medical conditions over a prolonged period, which significantly impair…

HAJIMOHMADSAFI ABDULREHMAN SHAIKH,VADODARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 2412/AHD/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2013-2014

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…ch should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay so as to advance substantial justice, and that technical considerations should not come in the way of adjudication on merits. Similarly, in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that length of delay is immaterial so long as the explanation is satisfactory and the delay is not attributable to mala fide intention. 30. In the present case, the assessee has demonstrated that he was suffering from serious and life-threatening medical conditions over a prolonged period, which significantly impair…

HAJIMOHMADSAFI ABDULREHMAN SHAIKH,VADODARA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 2339/AHD/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2012-2013

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Talati, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P Meena, Sr. DR
Section 131Section 143(3)Section 68

…ch should be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay so as to advance substantial justice, and that technical considerations should not come in the way of adjudication on merits. Similarly, in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that length of delay is immaterial so long as the explanation is satisfactory and the delay is not attributable to mala fide intention. 30. In the present case, the assessee has demonstrated that he was suffering from serious and life-threatening medical conditions over a prolonged period, which significantly impair…

M. PRATAPRAY PRINTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 497/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Mahesh Chhajed, A.RFor Respondent: Shri C Dharani Nath, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…uld be adopted while considering applications for condonation of delay so that substantial justice is advanced and technical considerations do not defeat the cause of justice. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 has further held that the length of delay is not material and what is material is the acceptability of the explanation for the delay. Similarly, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Vedabai @ Vaijayanatabai Baburao Patil v. Shantaram Baburao Patil & Others (2001) 253 ITR 798 (SC) has reiterated that a pragmatic and justice-oriented approach should be adopt…

BARAIYA GALAJI KALAJI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2180/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

…d sale consideration and merely relying on system-generated information without any independent inquiry or supporting evidence. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the settled judicial position laid down in: N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy [(1998) 7 SCC 123), where it was held that "length of delay is not material, what matters is the sufficiency of cause." Improvement Trust, Ludhiana v. Ujagar Singh ((2010) 6 SCC 786), which held that delay due to ignorance or bona fide mistake must be condoned in the interest of justice. CIT v. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. ((2011)…

BARAIYA GALAJI KALAJI,GANDHINAGAR vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 2179/AHD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Mar 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha, Accountant Member | ITA No: 2179 & 2180/Ahd/2025 | | Assessment Year: 2015-16 | | Baraiya Galaji Kalaji 93 Arjun Vas, Nana Chiloda, B.O. Ahmedabad Gandhinagar-382330 Gujarat, India PAN: BEMPB9663R (Appellant) | Vs | The ITO, Ward-1, Gandhinagar Gandhingar (Respondent) | Assessee Represented: Shri Chintan Thakkar, A.R. Revenue Represented: Shri Alpesh Parmar, CIT-DR Date of hearing : 03-03-2026 Date of pronouncement : 09-

Section 144Section 148Section 271(1)(b)

…d sale consideration and merely relying on system-generated information without any independent inquiry or supporting evidence. 5. That the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the settled judicial position laid down in: N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy [(1998) 7 SCC 123), where it was held that "length of delay is not material, what matters is the sufficiency of cause." Improvement Trust, Ludhiana v. Ujagar Singh ((2010) 6 SCC 786), which held that delay due to ignorance or bona fide mistake must be condoned in the interest of justice. CIT v. West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. ((2011)…

S 778 R PATTANAM PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY ,NAMAKKAL vs. ITO, WARD 2, NAMAKKAL, NAMAKKAL

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

ITA 3374/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S. R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr. V. Sreeraman, CA (Virtual)For Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 143(3)Section 249(3)Section 68

…in conflict, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred, for the other side cannot claim to have a vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. :-4-: ITA Nos. 3374/Chny/2025 9. In N.Balakrishnan v. M.Krishnamurthy (7 SCC 123), the Hon’ble Apex Court further clarified that the length of delay is not decisive; what is material is the acceptability and bona fides of the explanation. It was held that if the explanation does not smack of mala fides or is not intended as a dilatory tactic, the Court should ordinarily condone the delay so as to advance substantial justice. 1…

SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

ITA 579/AGR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Agra20 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)

…s risk. 6. It must be grasped that the judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so." 23. In N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Supreme Court again reiterated the approach. In Ram Nath Sao vs. CIT (Exemption) Bhopal Gobardhan Sao (2002) 3 SCC 195, it was observed by the Supreme Court that acceptance of the explanation furnished should be the rule and refusal, an exception, more so when no negligence or inaction or want of bona fides can be imputed to the defaulting par…

SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI ,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXTEMPTION) , BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

ITA 578/AGR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Agra20 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)

…s risk. 6. It must be grasped that the judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so." 23. In N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Supreme Court again reiterated the approach. In Ram Nath Sao vs. CIT (Exemption) Bhopal Gobardhan Sao (2002) 3 SCC 195, it was observed by the Supreme Court that acceptance of the explanation furnished should be the rule and refusal, an exception, more so when no negligence or inaction or want of bona fides can be imputed to the defaulting par…

TAHERALI ZABUAWALA,VADODARA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2439/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha

For Appellant: Shri Anil Brahmakshatriya, ARFor Respondent: Shri Yogesh Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 133ASection 249(2)Section 249(3)

…pragmatic and justice-oriented approach should be adopted while dealing with matters relating to condonation of delay and that ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. Similarly, in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the length of delay is not material and what is material is the acceptability of the explanation, and that refusal to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the threshold. 10. In the present case, the delay is of 70 days, which cannot be said to be inordinate. The Commissioner…

SHRI ACHLESHWAR MAHADEVJI JI SARVJANIK NIYAS,GWALIOR vs. CIT(E), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 417/AGR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year : 2025-26 Shri Achleshwar Mahadev Ji V Cit (Exemption) Sarvajanik Nyas, Sanatan Bhopal Dharm Mandir Road Gwalior- 474 001 Pan : Aahts1225J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

…s risk. 6. It must be grasped that the judiciary is respected not on account of its power to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so." 23. In N. Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, the Supreme Court again reiterated the approach. In Ram Nath Sao vs. 12 Shri Achleshwar Mahadev Ji Sarvajanik Nyas v CIT (Exemption)Bhopal Gobardhan Sao (2002) 3 SCC 195, it was observed by the Supreme Court that acceptance of the explanation furnished should be the rule and refusal, an exception, more so when no negligence or inaction or want o…

S.D EDUCATION SOCIETY,KARNAL vs. DCIT EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1088/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1087 & 1088/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 S.D. Education Society, The Dcit (Exemptions), S.D. Model Sr. Section. School, Vs Chandigarh. Railway Road, Karnal. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas5001P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Aneja, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri Girish Aneja, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 1087 & 1088/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 S.D. Education Society, The DCIT (Exemptions), S.D. Model Sr. Section. School, Vs Chandigarh. Railway Road, Karnal. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABAS5001P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Girish Aneja, CA Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 10.…

S.D EDUCATION SOCIETY,KARNAL vs. DCIT EXEMPTION, CHANDIGARH

In the result, both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1087/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1087 & 1088/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 S.D. Education Society, The Dcit (Exemptions), S.D. Model Sr. Section. School, Vs Chandigarh. Railway Road, Karnal. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabas5001P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Girish Aneja, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri Girish Aneja, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos. 1087 & 1088/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 & 2018-19 S.D. Education Society, The DCIT (Exemptions), S.D. Model Sr. Section. School, Vs Chandigarh. Railway Road, Karnal. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AABAS5001P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Girish Aneja, CA Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 09.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 10.…

MAHINDER KAUR,PANCHKULA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, PANCHKULA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 937/CHANDI/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 937/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mahinder Kaur, The Ito, Village-Manak Pur Devi, Vs Panchkula. Post Office-Pinjore, Tehsil-Kalka,Panchkula. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Bgnpm2629H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Mukesh Pandey, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 04.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Pandey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, ‘B’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 937/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12 Mahinder Kaur, The ITO, Village-Manak Pur Devi, Vs Panchkula. Post Office-Pinjore, Tehsil-Kalka,Panchkula. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: BGNPM2629H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Pandey, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 04.02.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 09.02.2026 PHYSICAL HEA…

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK,BAIJNATH vs. ITO(TDS), PALAMPUR

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 778/CHANDI/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, then, Hon'ble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to be used liberally. We may make reference to the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme court from the decision in the case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…ITA No.410, 748,777 &778/CHD/2025 A.Y.2013-4 to 2016-17 2 of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 16.09.2024, 26.05.2023, 26.05.2023 and 26.05.2023 passed for assessment years 2013-14 to 2016-17 respectively. 2. The Registry has pointed out that ITA No. 410/CHD/2025 is time barred by 110 days whereas other appeals, namely, ITA 748, 777 and 778/CHD/2025 are time barred by 634 days. 3. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay. According to the assessee, this delay happened on account of non-prosecution of litigation by the earlier counsel. We have directed the ld. counsel for th…

Showing 1–20 of 359 · Page 1 of 18

...