← All Phrases

“Section 119(2)”

Section References (mined)Section 119Section 119(2)554 judgments

The decision most relied on for Section 119(2) is Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (267 ITR 272), cited in 501 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on Section 119(2)

Commissioner of Customs v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.
267 ITR 272 · 2004 · Supreme Court
501
citing judgments

CBDT and CBEC circulars, along with administrative instructions, are binding on departmental authorities, who must not act in contravention of them. However, these circulars and instructions are not binding on courts or assessees.

UCO Bank v. CIT
237 ITR 889 · 1999 · Supreme Court
486
citing judgments

CBDT circulars and instructions, while not binding on courts or assessees, are strictly binding on income-tax departmental authorities, who cannot act in contravention of them.

Gajanan Constructions v. DCIT
74 Taxmann.com 6 · 2016 · ITAT
465
citing judgments

Late fees under section 234E can only be levied prospectively from June 1, 2015. Levying late fees for periods prior to this date is not permissible.

CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd.
376 ITR 456 · 2015 · Supreme Court
221
citing judgments

The requirement to file a certificate or form (e.g., Form 10CCB, 10-IC) along with the return of income for claiming a deduction (e.g., under sections 80-IB, 115BAA) is directory regarding its timing. Such a deduction is allowable if the requisite form is filed before the final order of assessment, as procedural requirements should not override substantive benefits.

CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries
201 ITR 325 · 1993 · High Court
195
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the income tax return, as specified in provisions like Section 80J(6A) or 80-IA(7), is directory and not mandatory. Substantial compliance is achieved if the audit report is submitted at any time before the assessment is framed or completed, and benefits should not be denied merely due to a delay in furnishing it.

PCIT v. Wipro Ltd.
140 Taxmann.com 223 · 2022 · Supreme Court
192
citing judgments

Exemption provisions under Chapter III, such as Section 10B(8), must be interpreted strictly, and any claim for such exemptions must be made in the return of income. The principles governing Chapter III (incomes not forming part of total income) differ from those for Chapter VIA (deductions in computing total income).

Setty & Others vs. State of Karnataka (7) (1996) 1 SCC 345- Secretary Government of Madras v. P.R. Sriramulu
4 SCC 720 · 2008 · Reported
145
citing judgments

The validity of Section 234E of the Income Tax Act, 1961, inserted by the Finance Act, 2012, is examined by the court.

CIT v. Contimeters Electricals (P.) Ltd.
317 ITR 249 · 2009 · High Court
140
citing judgments

The requirement to file an audit report along with the return of income under section 80-IA(7) and similar provisions is directory, not mandatory. Such a report suffices if filed at any time before the assessment is framed.

Judgments citing Section 119(2)

St. Francis Xavier Church, Panvel vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Thane

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

ITA 5883/MUM/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Nov 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Justice (Retd.) Shri C.V. Bhadang & Shri Vikram Singh Yadavassessment Year : 2024-25 St. Francis Xavier Church Trust, Income Tax Officer, Plot 379/B, Behind Orion Mall Exemption Ward, Thane & S.T. Depot, Vs. Quershi Mansion, Panvel-410206. Gokhale Road, Pan : Aaets4913N Naupada, Thane-400602. (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : None For Revenue : Smt. B. Brahma Vidya Date Of Hearing : 25-11-2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25-11-2025 O R D E R Per Vikram Singh Yadav, A.M : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Addl/Jcit(A)-Agra, Dated 29-07-2025, Pertaining To Assessment Year (Ay) 2024-25, Wherein The Assessee Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1.1. On The Facts & In Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)] Erred In Confirming The Denial Of Exemption/Deductions Under Section 11 Of The Act Resorted To By The Centralized Processing Centre [Cpc), Income Tax Department, Bengaluru (The Learned Assessing Officer) While Processing The Return Of Income Under Section 143(1) Of The Act On The Grounds That The Audit Report In Form 10-Bb Was Filed Belatedly, Though With The Return Of Income Which Was Filed Within The Extended Time Limit Under Section 139(1) Of The Act.

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Smt. B. Brahma Vidya
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 11(6)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

also supports this view it clarifies that the Commissioners of Income-tax are authorised to condone delay in filing Form No. 10B under section 119(2)(b), subject to satisfaction of reasonable cause. While the assessee may not have approached the CIT for condonation under that route, the principle underlying

M/S. Assam Industrial Development Corporation Ltd., Guwahati vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-3, Guwahati

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 97/GTY/2020[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Guwahati20 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Manmohan Dasassessment Year: 2017-18 Assam Industrial Development Corporation Ltd……................……….……Appellant A-4, R G Baruah Road, Ambikagiri Nagar, Guwahati, Assam-781024. [Pan: Aacca4720A] Vs. Acit, Circle-3, Guwahati.………..…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Somnath Ghosh, Advocate & Amalan Bhadra, Fca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Sanjay Jha, Cit, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 20, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: This Is An Appeal Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(Appeals)-2, Guwahati (Hereinafter Referred To As The “Ld. Cit(A)”] Dated 27.02.2020 For The Ay 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Assessee Has Raised Legal Issue Challenged The Assessment Framed Based On Notice Issued U/S 143(2) Of The Act Which Is Not In Accordance With Instruction No. F. No. 225/157/2017/Ita-Ii Dated 23- 06-2017, Issued By The Cbdt.

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

statutory powers under section 119 of the Act which are binding on the authorities in the administration of the Act. Under section 119(2)(a), however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. The power is given for the purpose of just, proper and efficient management

Daiwa Capital Markets India Private Limited, Lower Parel vs. Asst Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 4 1 1 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed in above terms

ITA 5338/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhandaiwa Capital Markets India Acit Circle 4(1)(1), Private Limited Room No. 640, 6Th Floor, Office No. N10 & N11, 9Th Floor, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Dextrus-Peninsula Tower, Peninsula Mumbai-400 020 Corporate Park, G. K. Marg, Lower Parel, Delisle Road, Mumbai-400 013 Pan: Aaccd7178B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Ms. Shivali Mhatre, Ld. Ar Department Represented By : Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Ld. Dr Date Of Conclusion Of Hearing : 03.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.11.2025

Section 143(3)Section 250

under the Act, issues directions and delegates powers to subordinate authorities to deal with the matter in prescribed manner, including direction issued under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Unless and until such a delegated power is vested with the lower authorities, no discretion can be exercised ... made in the return of income filed earlier, other legal remedies available under the Act. Including filing of representation to CBDT under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act need to be explored. Appellant's claim that it did not come to know about the deduction of additional

Marelli (India) Private Limited, Gurugram vs. Deputy Commissionar of Income-Tax, Circle 16(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 1136/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sh. Sudhir Kumar & Sh.Manish Agarwalassessment Year: 2020-21 Marelli (India) Private Limited Vs Deputy Commissioner Of 5Th Floor, Tower 8, Candor Income Tax, Circle 16(1) Teachspace,One Reality Project Cr Building, Delhi It/Ites Sez Village Tikri Sector 48 Gurugram Haryana-122018 Pan No. Aagcm2620K (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250

duly update the 10IC form within extended date. He further submitted that the CTBT has condoned the delay under section 119(2) of the Act in filing of Form10- IC for Assessment year 2020-21. It is submitted that the date was extended up to 30- 06-2022 or three

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 20/GTY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

appeal raised by the appellant before her. 2. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A) FARIDABAD, NFAC, wrongly interpreted and applied the provisions of section 119(2)(b) for denying condonation of delay in filing form 10CCB without first considering the proviso (b) to section 119(1). 3. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 19/GTY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

appeal raised by the appellant before her. 2. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A) FARIDABAD, NFAC, wrongly interpreted and applied the provisions of section 119(2)(b) for denying condonation of delay in filing form 10CCB without first considering the proviso (b) to section 119(1). 3. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT

Nagahat Tea Estate Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer Ward -1, Jorhat

ITA 18/GTY/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Guwahati17 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 119(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 80

appeal raised by the appellant before her. 2. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT (A) FARIDABAD, NFAC, wrongly interpreted and applied the provisions of section 119(2)(b) for denying condonation of delay in filing form 10CCB without first considering the proviso (b) to section 119(1). 3. That the Ld. ADDL/JCIT

Late Chimanlal Jerambhai Bhagat Legal Heir Minaxi Rakeshbhai Kahar, Surat vs. ITO, Ward-1, Vapi

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

ITA 45/SRT/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat17 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Raghunath Kamble & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.45/Srt/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 (Hybrid Hearing) Lt.Chimanlal Jerambhai Bhagat Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, बनाम/ Legal Heir Minaxi Rakeshbhai Vapi -396 191 Vs. Kahar, Flat No.104, Lake Castle, Pal, Nr. Jainam, Surat-395 009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aclpb 6752 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Appellant By Shri Mukesh Mandowara, Ar राज" की ओर से /Respondent By Shri Ajay Uke, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 21/08/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 17/11/2025

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 50CSection 54B

dated 29.03.2019. Again assessee did not file any return subsequently assessee filed return declaring income of Rs.1,70,830/- under provisions of Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. In response to the show cause notice, assessee filed reply which are reproduced in assessment order. The explanation of the assessee

The Warangal District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Hanamkonda vs. DCIT, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

ITA 364/HYD/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.364/Hyd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2021-22) The Warangal District Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Cooperative Central Bank Income Tax, Limited, Hanamkonda, Circle-3(1), Warangal. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabtt3137G (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Sri S. Rama Rao, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of 11/11/2025 Hearing: घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of 14/11/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Ravish Sood, J.M:

For Appellant: Sri S. Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 234CSection 36(1)(va)

notice by the Ld. AR, the assessee had thereafter filed an application with the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) on 02.08.2023 under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, seeking condonation of the delay in filing Form 10IF. The CBDT, after considering the facts, vide its order dated

Dhirendra Chandra Biswas, Jirat vs. ACIT, Circle 24(1), Hooghly

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1722/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Nov 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shripradip Kumar Choubey, Jm

Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

statutory powers under section 119 of the Act which are binding on the authorities in the administration of the Act. Under section 119(2)(a), however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. The power is given for the purpose of just, proper and efficient management

Bible Fellowship Centre Wagholi, Pune vs. ITO, Exemption, Ward-1(2), Pune

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed as per the terms indicated above

ITA 1887/PUN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: Shri B.C. MalakarFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Tripathi
Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80G

filing of Form No.10/9A for A.Y. 2016-17 and the same reads as under : “Sub: Condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in filing of Form no. 10 and Form No. 9A for AY 2016-17 Under the provisions of section ... been requested that the delay in filing of Form No. 9A and Form No.10 for AY 2016-17 may be condoned under section 119(2) (b) of the Act 5. Accordingly, in supersession of earlier Circular/Instruction issued in this regard, with a view to expedite the disposal of applications filed

Pravin Prakashchand Mehta, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 8(3), Pune

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

ITA 475/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms.Astha Chandra & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No.475/Pun/2024 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Pravin Prakashchand Mehta, V The Income Tax Officer, B 10, Pati Regency, S Ward-8(3), Pune. Erandwane, Pune – 411004. Pan: Aavpm4448H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Ms Sampada Ingale (Virtual) On Behalf Of Shri Suhas P. Bora – Ar Revenue By Shri Sandeep P Sathe – Jcit Date Of Hearing 06/10/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2025 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeal(Nfac) Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 For A.Y.2016-17 Dated 11.01.2024 Emanating From The Assessment Order Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 08.03.2017. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under :

Section 119(2)Section 143(1)Section 246ASection 250Section 250(4)Section 250(6)Section 251Section 251(1)(a)

आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण ”एस एम सी” न्यायपीठ पुणेमें। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “SMC” :: PUNE BEFORE MS.ASTHA

Cheyutha for Wellbeing Foundation, Ranga Reddy vs. CIT (Exemption), Hyderabad

ITA 1227/HYD/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad31 Oct 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Us:

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

regular registration under Section 80G of the Act, but the assessee trust remains at liberty to approach the CBDT for condonation under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Thereafter, the CIT(Exemptions) is directed to take up and dispose of the application filed by the assessee trust for regular

Orchid Corp, Surat vs. ITO, Ward 1(1)(1), Surat

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

ITA 1119/SRT/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1119/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2021-22) (Hybrid Hearing) Orchid Corp., Vs. Ito, F-11, Orchid Ventura, Nr. New Lp Ward - 1(1)(1), Savani School, Palanpore Canal Surat Road, Surat - 395009 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaffo2395F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Shri Suresh K. Kabra, Ca Respondent By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 31/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 29/10/2025

Section 10B(8)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 80ASection 80I

delay in filing the return is condoned by the competent income-tax authority in terms of provisions of section 119(2)(b) of the Act. The CIT(A) is not the competent authority, which is clear from the language of section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Hence

Leader People Service Charitable Trust, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam

ITA 471/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.471/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: Na) Leader People Service Vs. The Income Tax Officer Charitable Trust, (Exemption Ward), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aabtl4868N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Sri Gvn Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 29/10/2025 Pronouncement: O R D E R "ित रवीश सूद, जे.एम./Per Ravish Sood, J.M. The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Trust Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(Exemptions)”], Hyderabad, Dated 17.06.2025 Rejecting Its Application Filed In “Form No. 10Ab” For Regular Registration Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”). The Assessee

For Appellant: Sri GVN Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

Charitable Trust vs. ITO (Exemption Ward) of the Act, but, the assessee trust remains at liberty to approach the CBDT for condonation under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Thereafter, the CIT(Exemptions) is directed to take up and dispose of the application filed by the assessee trust

Cp Reddy Charitable Trust, Rajahmundry vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad

ITA 470/VIZ/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam29 Oct 2025

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Balakrishnan S.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.470/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: Na) C P Reddy Charitable Vs. Commissioner Of Income Trust, Tax (Exemption), Rajahmundry. Hyderabad. Pan: Aabtc3393F (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा/Assessee By: Smt. V. Krishna Kumari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, Cit- Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of 29/10/2025 Pronouncement: O R D E R "ित रवीश सूद, जे.एम./Per Ravish Sood, J.M. The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Trust Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Exemptions) [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(Exemptions)”], Hyderabad, Dated 17.06.2025 Rejecting Its Application Filed In “Form No. 10Ab” For Regular Registration Under Section 80G(5) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, “The Act”). The Assessee

For Appellant: Smt. V. Krishna KumariFor Respondent: Sri Badicala Yadagiri, CIT-
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

regular registration under Section 80G of the Act, but, the assessee trust remains at liberty to approach the CBDT for condonation under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. Thereafter, the CIT(Exemptions) is directed to take up and dispose of the application filed by the assessee trust for regular

Rural Development Foundation, Anand vs. CPC, Bengaluru Juris. AO- the ITO, Ward-Exemption, Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 927/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.927/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-20 Rural Development Cpc, Bengaluru बनाम/ Foundation Juris.Ao – The Ito Ward- V/S. Aitc, 2Nd Floor Exemption Narayan Complex Vadodara – 390 007 Nr.Shubh Laxmi Shopping Centre Station Road Anand – 388 001 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aabtr 1090 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Arti N. Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 29/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 21/02/2025 Passed U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-2020. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: Rural Development Foundation Vs. Cpc, Bengaluru Juris Ao The Ito, Ward-Exemption Asst. Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Ms. Arti N. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rameshwar P. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

condonation of delay or relaxation of statutory conditions. The appellate authority further noted that the Act provides a specific remedy under section 119(2)(b) empowering the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) to condone delay in filing returns or audit reports, and directed the assessee to approach the competent

Volark Leasing Ifsc Pvt. Ltd, Gujarat vs. ACIT/DCIT, Circle, Gandhinagar, Gujarat

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 357/AHD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Smt. Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Pancham Sethi, ARFor Respondent: Date of Hearing
Section 143Section 143(1)Section 234BSection 250Section 80Section 80JSection 80L

Section 119 empowers the Board to issue orders and guidelines regarding the condonation of delay in compliance with any provision of the Act. Section 119(2) reads as follows: Section 119(2) (a) … (b) the Board may, if it considers it desirable or expedient so to do for avoiding genuine ... application or claim and deal with the same on merits in accordance with law.” 4.5 It is evident from the CBDT Circulars and Section 119(2)(b) that the Assessing Officer (AO), Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [JCIT(A)], and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

Triloknath Vatsalya Vatika, Gandhinagar vs. The Dy.CIT, CPC, Bangalore Present Jao- the ITO, Ward-1 (Exemption), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1092/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1092/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Triloknath Vatsalya Vatika The Dy.Cit बनाम/ At Balva Cpc Bangalore. V/S. Nr. Tahuko Hotel Present Jao Kalol The Ito Ward-1(Exemption) Gandhinagar – 382 001 Ahmedabad-380 015 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aants 5604 B (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) ("" यथ"/ Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri R.P. Rastogi, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15/10/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28/10/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Siddhartha Nautiyal, Jm: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10/03/2025 Passed By The Office Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax, Appeal Addl/Jcit(A)-Gwalior [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”], U/S.250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”), For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2017-18. 2. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250Section 44A

condonation of delay in filing Form 10B up to three years by the Principal Chief Commissioner or Chief Commissioner of Income-tax under section 119(2)(b) of the Act, and observed that the assessee had not sought such condonation from the competent authority. The CIT(Appeals) held that neither

M/S Nihal Projects, Kachchh vs. ITO Ward 2, Gandhidham

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is

ITA 929/RJT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 234ASection 274Section 43BSection 68

statutory powers under section 119 of the Act which are binding on the authorities in the administration of the Act, under section 119(2)(a), however, the circulars as contemplated therein cannot be adverse to the assessee. The power is given for the purpose of just, proper and efficient management