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.

368

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,518 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

Punjab National Bank, Baijnath vs. ITO(TDS), Palampur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 777/CHANDI/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Feb 2026AY 2015-16

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…

Punjab National Bank, Baijnath vs. ITO(TDS), Palampur

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 748/CHANDI/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

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…

Punjab National Bank, Parwanoo vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS), Solan

In the result, all appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 410/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh05 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

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…

Dd 587 A, Vellodu Paccs, Dindigul vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dindigul

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3282/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Feb 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms. Padmavathy.Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3282/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Mr.K. Balasubramanian, C.A *+For Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl. CIT
Section 148Section 250Section 69A

…ce all the necessary documentary evidence related to the assessment proceedings for our society. In the case of N Balakrishnan vs. M. Krishnamurthy 1998 9 TMI 602 Supreme Court Other Citation: 2008 228 E.L.T. 162 SC, 1998 AIR 3222, 1998 1 Suppl. SCR 403, 1998 7 SCC 123, 1998 6 JT 242, 1998 5 SCALE 105, it was averred/held, as follows, by the Hon'ble Supreme Court 9. It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the court. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptabili…

Saheed Darshan Filling Station, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer (ITO), Ward 3, Khanna

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed and Stay Application is dismissed

ITA 1736/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1736/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shaheed Darshan Filling Station, The Ito, Village-Iraq, Kohara Road, Vs Ward-3, Machhiwara, So-Irak, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarfs1129H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & S.A. No. 5/Chd/2026 In आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1736/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shaheed Darshan Filling Station, The Ito, Village-Iraq, Kohara Road, Vs Ward-3, Machhiwara, So-Irak, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aarfs1129H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Sifatpreet Singh, Ca & Shri Amanjot Singh, Ca Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 28.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2026 Physical Hearing O R D E R Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Sifatpreet Singh, CA and Shri Amanjot Singh, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण,च"ीगढ़ "ायपीठ, च"ीगढ़ 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. 1736/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shaheed Darshan Filling Station, The ITO, Village-Iraq, Kohara Road, Vs Ward-3, Machhiwara, SO-Irak, Ludhiana. Khanna. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AARFS1129H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent & S.A. No. 5/CHD/2026 in आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1736/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19 Shaheed Darshan Filling Station, The ITO, Village-Iraq,…

Sahil Phutela, Ambala City vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Ambala

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1383/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1383/Chd/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Sahil Phutela, The Ito, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh,Advocate, Vs Ward -4, 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. Ambala. "थायीलेखासं./Pan No: Cmvpp7771G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Sr. DR
Section 144BSection 147Section 249Section 253Section 271ESection 3Section 5

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ,च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH, ‘SMC’ CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1383/CHD/2025 "नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Sahil Phutela, The ITO, C/o Shri Tej Mohan Singh,Advocate, Vs Ward -4, 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. Ambala. "थायीलेखासं./PAN NO: CMVPP7771G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 22.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 03.02.2026 PHYSICAL HEARING O R D E R The assessee is in appeal before the…

Shri Rajbirinder Singh Chahal, Chandigarh vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(5), Chandigarh

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

ITA 1157/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1157/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Rajbirinder Singh Chahal, The Ito, C/O Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Vs Ward 5(5), # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aeepc0143E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue By : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. Cit Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.02.2026

For Appellant: Shri Tej Mohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR
Section 249Section 251(1)(a)Section 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. 1157/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shri Rajbirinder Singh Chahal, The ITO, C/o Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Vs Ward 5(5), # 527, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh. Chandigarh. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AEEPC0143E अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Tej Mohan Singh, Advocate Revenue by : Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 03.02.2026 Date of Pronouncem…

Kamal Kishore, Sujangarh vs. ITO Ward-3 Churu, Churu

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 538/JODH/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE (Accountant Member), SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 148Section 234ASection 69A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Kamal Kishore, ITO, Ward-3, Harijan Samday Bhawan Ke Churu. Piche, Ward No.30, Bhojlai Bass, Sujangarh, Churu – 331507. PAN No. CVUPK7918N Assessee by Shri Shrawan Kumar Gupta, Advocate (Virtually) Shri Karni Dan, Addl. CIT-DR (Physically) Revenue by Date of Hearing 08.01.2026. Date of Pronouncement 28.01.2026. ORDER DR. MITHA LAL MEENA, A.M.: The appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi[hereinaft…

Sh. Jatinder Kaura (Deceased) Through L/H Smt. Dimple Kaura, Raikot, Ludhiana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Jagraon

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1394/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1394/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Jatinder Kaura The Ito, (Through L/H Smt. Dimple Kaura, Vs Ward-1, House No. 338, New Green City, Jagraon. Raikot, Distt. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Agwpk6095P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Kuldeep Singh, Itp & Shri Mps Malhotra, Itp Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 22.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.01.2026

For Appellant: Shri Kuldeep Singh, ITP & Shri MPS Malhotra, ITPFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘SMC’ BENCH ,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 1394/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18 Shri Jatinder Kaura The ITO, (Through L/H Smt. Dimple Kaura, Vs Ward-1, House No. 338, New Green City, Jagraon. Raikot, Distt. Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AGWPK6095P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kuldeep Singh, ITP & Shri MPS Malhotra, ITP Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 22.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement : 28.01.2026 HYBRID HEA…

Jasmine Zubin Shroff, Pune vs. ITO, Ward-7(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 2380/PUN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.2380/Pun/2025 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mrs.Jasmine Zubin Shroff V The Income Tax (Through Legal Heir Zubin K S Officer, Shroff), Ward-7(1), Pune. 826/C No.5, Anklesharia Blocks, Dastur Meher Road, Camp, Pune - 411001. Pan:Basps7144E Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri B C Malakar Revenue By Shri Sandeep Sathe - Jcit Date Of Hearing 08/12/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 28/01/2026 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Legal Heir Of Late Jasmine Z. Shroff Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For The A.Y.2012-13 Dated 19.12.2023 Emanating From The Assessment Order Passed Under Section 144 Of The

Section 144Section 250

…merit. V. Karanjia Terminal & Logistics (P) Ltd. [2019] 101 taxmann.com 160 (Bom-HC) n this case delay of 198 days in filing the appeal was condoned. vi. AUTOSER (P.) Ltd. [1998] 101 Taxman 70 (Coch.) (Mag) vii. N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998} 7 SCC 123, 1998 (9) TMI 602 SC; 6 ITA No.2380/PUN/2025 [A] Condonation of Delay : 3. Assessee was admitted for treatment of Cancer, unfortunately she died. Legal Heir of the Assessee has filed copy of the Death Certificate. In these facts and circumstances of the case, we condone the delay of 593 days in filing appeal before this Tribunal. Submission of ld…

Revanth Reddy Anumala, Banjara Hills vs. A.C.I.T Central Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

ITA 650/HYD/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: CA K C DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

…er to legalize injustice on technical grounds but because it is capable of removing injustice and is expected to do so. Similarly, we would like to authoritative pronouncement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of N. Balakrishnan Vs. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 dated 03.09.1998. It reads as under: "Rule of limitation are not meant to destroy the right of parties. They are meant to see that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy promptly. The object of providing a legal remedy is to repair the damage caused by reason of legal injury. Law of limitation fixes a life-span for such le…

Deepika Singla, Barnala vs. ITO, Ward 1, Barnala

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 610/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 610/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year. : 2017-18 Deepika Singla, Vs The Ito, Lekh Raj Moti Lal, Ward-1, Sadar Bazar, Barnala. Barnala. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Awzps9654H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee By : Shri Nagesh Behl, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. Cit Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 O R D E R Hybrid Hearing Per Raj Pal Yadav, Vp

For Appellant: Shri Nagesh Behl, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 271ASection 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. 610/CHD/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year. : 2017-18 Deepika Singla, Vs The ITO, Lekh Raj Moti Lal, Ward-1, Sadar Bazar, Barnala. Barnala. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AWZPS9654H अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Assessee by : Shri Nagesh Behl, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT Sr.DR Date of Hearing : 24.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27.01.2026 O R D E R HYBRID HEARING PER…

Sh. Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-34(5), Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 3671/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(3)Section 271A

…d. The submission of the applicant is that technical considerations cannot and should not act as bar to the cause of substantial justice and in any case, there is no loss/prejudice to revenue. Reliance is placed on following judicial pronouncements: i) (1998) 7 SCC 123 N. Balakrishan v. M. Krishnamurthy “It must be remembered that in very case of delay, there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him. If the explanation does not smack of mala fides or it is not put forth as part of dilatory strategy, the court must show…

Sh. Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Delhi vs. ITO Ward-34(5), Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 3670/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(3)Section 271A

…d. The submission of the applicant is that technical considerations cannot and should not act as bar to the cause of substantial justice and in any case, there is no loss/prejudice to revenue. Reliance is placed on following judicial pronouncements: i) (1998) 7 SCC 123 N. Balakrishan v. M. Krishnamurthy “It must be remembered that in very case of delay, there can be some lapse on the part of the litigant concerned. That alone is not enough to turn down his plea and to shut the door against him. If the explanation does not smack of mala fides or it is not put forth as part of dilatory strategy, the court must show…

Hitech Flyash India Private Limited, Tuticorin vs. Assistant Commissioner, Tirunelveli

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3105/CHNY/2025[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Dec 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Shri S.R.Raghunathaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.3105/Chny/2025 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17 V. Hitech Fly Ash India Pvt Ltd., Acit, 2/101-5, Thiruchendur Road, Income Tax Office Muthiahpuram Tuticorn, Tirunelveli, Nellai City Centre Tuticorin-628005, Tiruchendup. Road Tamil Nadu Rahmath Nagar, Tirunelveli-627011 [Pan: Aabch 7093 J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (" यथ"/Respondent)

…enefit of a few.” Hitech Fly Ash India Pvt Ltd Vs ACTI, Tirunelveli :: 8 :: 31. In the case of Lanka Venkateswarlu (D) by LRs v. State of Andhra Pradesh & others, (2011) 4 SCC 363, this Court made the following observations: “20. In N. Balakrishnan, [(1998) 7 SCC 123] this Court again reiterated the principle that: (SCC p. 127, para 11) “11. Rules of limitation are not meant to destroy the rights of parties. They are meant to see that [the] parties do not resort to dilatory tactics, but seek their remedy promptly.” 21 to 27......... 28. We are at a loss to fathom any logic or rationale, which could have impel…

August Jewellery Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. D.C.I.T., Circle 1(1)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 1457/BANG/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Miraj Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

…ed” must be applied rationally and not pedantically, and that when substantial justice and technical considerations conflict, the cause of substantial justice must prevail. 6. These principles have been reaffirmed in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the primary function of the judiciary is to adjudicate disputes and advance substantial justice. The Court held that limitation laws are not meant to destroy the rights of parties but to ensure that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics. The Supreme Court clarified that the length of delay is irrelevan…

August Jewellery Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. D.C.I.T., Circle 1(1)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 1420/BANG/2025[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Miraj Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

…ed” must be applied rationally and not pedantically, and that when substantial justice and technical considerations conflict, the cause of substantial justice must prevail. 6. These principles have been reaffirmed in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the primary function of the judiciary is to adjudicate disputes and advance substantial justice. The Court held that limitation laws are not meant to destroy the rights of parties but to ensure that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics. The Supreme Court clarified that the length of delay is irrelevan…

August Jewellery Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. D.C.I.T., Circle 1(1)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1419/BANG/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri. Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri. Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri. Miraj Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri. Shivanand H Kalakeri, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore
Section 143(3)Section 270ASection 271ASection 68

…ed” must be applied rationally and not pedantically, and that when substantial justice and technical considerations conflict, the cause of substantial justice must prevail. 6. These principles have been reaffirmed in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123, where the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the primary function of the judiciary is to adjudicate disputes and advance substantial justice. The Court held that limitation laws are not meant to destroy the rights of parties but to ensure that parties do not resort to dilatory tactics. The Supreme Court clarified that the length of delay is irrelevan…

Sukhdev Raj, Sirsa vs. Income Tax Officer, Sirsa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 632/CHANDI/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Dec 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR
Section 10(37)Section 147Section 234ASection 234BSection 253Section 28Section 56(2)(viii)Section 57

…easons placed on record along with the supporting affidavit, it is observed that the delay is neither intentional nor due to negligence but is supported by sufficient and bona fide cause. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 and Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 (SC) has held that courts should take a liberal view in matters of condonation when sufficient cause is shown, and substantive justice should prevail over technicalities. Respectfully following the above judicial precedents and in the interest of justice, the delay of 181 days in fil…

Sunny Vijay Lakhani, Mumbai vs. ACIT, 28(3), Mumbai

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6950/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (SR DR)For Respondent: Ms. Ritika Aggarwal
Section 68

…antial liberal approach in condoning delays where substantial liberal approach in condoning delays where substantial justice is at stake. The Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan justice is at stake. The Supreme Court in N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy (1998) 7 SCC 123 further held that (1998) 7 SCC 123 further held that v. M. Krishnamurthy length of delay is immaterial so long as the explanation is length of delay is immaterial so long as the explanation is satisfactory and the conduct bona fide. satisfactory and the conduct bona fide. 5.3 Applying these principles, we find that the delay is Applying these prin…