← All Phrases

“reasonable cause”

PenaltySection 273BSection 273B7,285 judgments

The decision most relied on for reasonable cause is Ashok Pai v. CIT (292 ITR 11), cited in 812 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on reasonable cause

Ashok Pai v. CIT
292 ITR 11 · 2007 · Supreme Court
812
citing judgments

“Concealment of particulars of income” and “furnishing inaccurate particulars of income” are two distinct offences under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act. A penalty cannot be levied under one limb if the show cause notice or basis for penalty specifies the other, as this constitutes a complete variance in the reasons for assuming jurisdiction.

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.
2 SCC 107 · 1987 · Supreme Court
451
citing judgments

Courts must adopt a liberal approach when considering applications for condonation of delay, preferring to decide cases on their merits rather than allowing technicalities of limitation to scuttle justice. This principle applies to ensure the substantive rights of parties are not defeated by minor delays.

Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy
7 SCC 123 · 1998 · Supreme Court
368
citing judgments

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.

Akhil Bhartiya Prathmik Shikshak Sangh Bhawan Trust v. ADIT
115 TTJ 419 · 2008 · ITAT
292
citing judgments

Penalty under Section 272A(1)(d) for non-compliance with a notice issued under Section 142(1) is not leviable when the assessee demonstrates a reasonable cause for such non-compliance. The decision defines what constitutes 'reasonable cause' in this context.

Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT
280 ITR 357 · 2006 · High Court
182
citing judgments

The expression "sufficient cause" for condoning delay in filing appeals must receive a liberal and purposive construction. This approach aims to advance substantial justice, which is of paramount importance.

CIT v. K.S.P. Shanmugavel Nadai and Ors.
153 ITR 596 · 1985 · High Court
171
citing judgments

Where a reasonable cause for delay in filing an appeal exists, the period of delay may not be a relevant factor for condonation. The court has condoned even substantial delays, such as nearly 21 years, based on the presence of a reasonable cause.

People Education and Economic Development Society (PEEDS) v. ITO
100 ITD 87 · 2006 · ITAT
121
citing judgments

When substantial justice and procedural technicalities are in conflict, especially in cases involving non-deliberate delay, the cause of substantial justice must be prioritized. The opposing party cannot claim a vested right to benefit from injustice due to such delays.

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Noida Toll Bridge Co. Ltd.
262 ITR 260 · 2003 · High Court
121
citing judgments

Journal entries for accepting or repaying loans and deposits, without any actual cash transaction, do not violate the provisions of Section 269SS or Section 269T of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, such transactions do not attract penalties under Section 271D or Section 271E.

Judgments citing reasonable cause

Dr. Farokh Master, Mumbai vs. Addll/Joint/Deputy /Asst/Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2420/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjeeassessment Year : 2018-19 Dr. Farokh Master, Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax, 1St Floor, Vatcha Gandhi Circle-16(2), Memorial Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Hughes Road, Churchgate, Babulnath, Mumbai. Mumbai Pan : Aalpm3004F (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri V. Chandrasekhar A/W. Shri Harshad Shah For Revenue : Shri Aashish Kumar,Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing : 28-10-2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 28-10-2024 Order Per B.R. Baskaran, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri V. Chandrasekhar a/wFor Respondent: Shri Aashish Kumar,Sr.DR
Section 147Section 148

Ld.AR submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without condoning the delay of 114 days, though there was reasonable cause for the assessee in filing the appeal belated. He submitted that the assessee, inter alia, has taken a ground relating to 2 validity

Makashood Asharaf, Lakhimpur Kheri vs. The Income Tax Officer, Lakhimpur Kheri

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 200/LKW/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow25 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2016-17 Makashood Asharaf, 98-Moh. The Income Tax Officer, Seikh Sarain, Kheri Town, Distt.- Vs. Range-3(4), Lakhimpur Kheri- Lakhimpur Kheri-1 (U.P.) 1 Pan:Bkwpa9250R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Revenue By: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 29.08.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 25.10.2024 O R D E R Per Sh. Nikhil Choudhary: This Is An Appeal Filed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), Nfac Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 28.07.2022 Upholding The Penalty Levied Under Section 271B By The Ito-3(4), Lakhimpur-1 Vide His Order Dated 25.11.2019. The Grounds Of Appeal Preferred Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Sh. Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271BSection 44A

confirming the penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- imposed u/s 271B of I. T. Act without appreciating that there was a reasonable cause for non filing of Audit Report within the due date prescribed under the Act. 2- That the authorities below erred on facts ... demonstrate this. He further opined that despite being given an opportunity, the assessee had A.Y. 2016-17 Makashood Asharaf failed to provide any reasonable cause to the ld. AO for the delay in the filing of the audit report. Therefore, the provisions of section 271B was squarely applicable

Dinesh Ramanbhai Patel, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(1), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1506/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1506/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2017-18 Dinesh Ramanbhai Patel The Ito बनाम/ 23, Shyam Sharan Part-2 Ward-3(2)(1) V/S. Aarohi Club Road Ahmedabad Bopal-Ghuma Ahmedabad – 380 058 (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Btbpp 3659 P अपीलाथ%/ (Appellant) &' यथ%/ (Respondent) ….. Assessee By : Shri Shri Kushal Fofaria, Ar Revenue By : Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/10/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am:

For Appellant: Shri Shri Kushal Fofaria, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.K. Mangla, Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250(6)Section 272ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 272A(3)(aa)Section 69

erred in law and on facts of the case in levying penalty without even dealing with the reasonable cause explained by the appellant for not complying with the notices u/s. 142(1) of the Act, thus resulting in gross violation of principles of natural justice. 6. The appellant craves leave ... issue requires a fresh look by the CIT(A) on remand. 7.3. The assessee's contention that the penalty was levied without considering the reasonable cause for non-compliance is significant and should have been addressed by the AO and the CIT(A). Failure to consider such explanations would result

Narayan Abarao Jadhav Pishor Tal. Kannad Pishor, Aurangabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(4), Aurangabad

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

ITA 2064/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2064/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.S.Rajpurohit
Section 144Section 234ASection 250

deciding it afresh. The assessee is directed to remain vigilant in fresh proceedings and should refrain from taking unnecessary adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Pankaj Balasaheb Kokate, Ahmednagar vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Ahmednagar

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

ITA 1977/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri B.S.Rajpurohit
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

Pankaj Balasaheb Kokate remain vigilant in the proceeding before ld. AO and should refrain from taking unnecessary adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee on merits are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Sanjay Nimba Pawar, Nashik vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Malegaon

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

ITA 1972/PUN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1972/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri B.S.Rajpurohit
Section 144Section 148Section 249(3)Section 250Section 69A

ld.CIT(A) was not satisfied with the explanation about the delay in filing the appeal and observed that the assessee has not shown any reasonable cause and went ahead to dismiss the appeal in limine under the provisions of section 249(3) r.w.s.250 of the Act. 7. I observe that ... with law. The assessee is directed to remain vigilant in the fresh proceedings and should refrain from taking unnecessary adjournments unless otherwise required for reasonable cause. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 9. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

Abdul Irfan Abdul Ajij Sheikh, Wardha vs. ITO, Ward-2, Wardha

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

ITA 78/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Ms. Shrishti PandeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 69A

that the assessee is prevented in filing the appeal belatedly and we are satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. Consequently, we condone the delay of 20 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 3. Insofar

Vnit Karmachari Sahakari Pat Sanstha, Nagpur vs. ITO Ward 1(5), Nagpur

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 134/NAG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)

within COVID-19 period and substantial period would be excluded while calculating the delay and for balance period of delay, the assessee had provided reasonable cause. 4. Whether on the facts and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in upholding the action of learned AO in disallowing deduction claimed ... that the assessee is prevented in filing the appeal belatedly and I am satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. Consequently, I hereby condone the delay of 22 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit

Anand Govind Thatte, Nagpur vs. ITO, Ward-2(2), Nagpur

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

ITA 127/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 56(2)(vii)

present appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. 7. The impugned appeal is thus delayed on account of the reasons mentioned hereinabove which constitute reasonable cause and the delay cannot be deemed to be wilful nor unreasonable. The delay deserves to be condoned and the appeal deserves to be admitted ... that the assessee is prevented in filing the appeal belatedly and we are satisfied that the delay in filing the appeal is due to reasonable cause. Consequently, we condone the delay of 242 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 5. The learned

Shri Prakash Jiwandas Wanjari, Nagpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur

In the result, we are of the considered view that the case on hand does not warrant levy of penalty under Section 271D of the Act

ITA 232/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 269SSection 271DSection 273ASection 80C

provisions of section 273A of the Act where it mentioned that no penalty shall be levied under section 271D where the assessee proves a reasonable cause for undertaking transactions in violation of provisions of section 269SS. 4. The appellant craves to add, delete, insert and omit any ground or part ... Therefore, the policy of law has always been to reject the plea of ignorance of law. 2.14 The LAO here did not consider the reasonable cause as mentioned in the provision of Section 273B which are as follows: Notwithstanding anything contained in the provisions of clause (b) of sub- section

M/S. Arun Excello Construction LLP, Royapettah Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 2168/CHNY/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Hon’Ble & Shri S. R. Raghunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 2168/Chny/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Arun Excello Constructions Assistant Commissioner Of Llp, 18 Bhattad Towers, V. Income Tax, West Cott Road, Non Corporate Circle -11(1), Royapettah, Chennai – 600 014. Chennai. [Pan: Aaufa-2577-J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Mr. Shrenik Chordia, Ca : Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, Jcit ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.10.2024 आदेश /O R D E R

For Appellant: Mr. Shrenik Chordia, CA
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 14ASection 249(2)(b)Section 249(3)

which has not been condoned u/s.249(3) of the Act, stating that the reason for delay explained by the assessee is not sufficient and reasonable cause. In the facts and :-6-: ITA. No: 2168/Chny/2024 circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that, in the interest of justice

Bhim Foundation, Nainital vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (E)Q, Lucknow

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

ITA 169/LKW/2020[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaassessment Year: N.A. Bhim Foundation, Commissioner Of Income V. Aashirwad Bhawan Tax (Exemption) Damuadunga, Kathgodam, Lucknow. Nainital-263126. Pan:Aadab2156J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri. Manu Chaurasia, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 23 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 10 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Manu Chaurasia, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 8

approach Page 4 of 4 this Tribunal, in accordance with law, for restoration of the appeal for disposal on merits, if the assessee advances reasonable cause for non-appearance when the appeal was called out for hearing on 23/10/2024. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands dismissed

Sukhdham Residency, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1340/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prothviraj Meena, CIT D.R. & Shri Sanjay Kumar
Section 147

Appellant hereby pray to remand case back to CIT(A) for fresh hearing. 4. I hereby pray your honour to in view of above reasonable causes for non-compliances, Appellant hereby pray for set aside order of Assessing officer. 5. Your appellant craves to add/alter any of the grounds

Sukhdham Residency, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1339/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prothviraj Meena, CIT D.R. & Shri Sanjay Kumar
Section 147

Appellant hereby pray to remand case back to CIT(A) for fresh hearing. 4. I hereby pray your honour to in view of above reasonable causes for non-compliances, Appellant hereby pray for set aside order of Assessing officer. 5. Your appellant craves to add/alter any of the grounds

Sukhdham Residency, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1338/AHD/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prothviraj Meena, CIT D.R. & Shri Sanjay Kumar
Section 147

Appellant hereby pray to remand case back to CIT(A) for fresh hearing. 4. I hereby pray your honour to in view of above reasonable causes for non-compliances, Appellant hereby pray for set aside order of Assessing officer. 5. Your appellant craves to add/alter any of the grounds

Sukhdham Residency, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-2(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 1337/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prothviraj Meena, CIT D.R. & Shri Sanjay Kumar
Section 147

Appellant hereby pray to remand case back to CIT(A) for fresh hearing. 4. I hereby pray your honour to in view of above reasonable causes for non-compliances, Appellant hereby pray for set aside order of Assessing officer. 5. Your appellant craves to add/alter any of the grounds

Margi Darpan Shah, Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(2), Vadodara

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

ITA 1336/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 144

fresh hearing. Margi Darpan Shah vs. ACIT Asst.Year –2018-19 - 2– 4. I hereby pray your honour to in view of above reasonable causes for non-compliances, Appellant hereby pray for set aside order of Assessing officer. 5. Your appellant craves to add/alter any of the grounds of appeal

Kamil Ayub Momin, Pune vs. ITO Ward 9(3), Pune

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

ITA 1888/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1888/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18

For Respondent: Assessee by Shri Pratik B. Sandhbhor
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 69A

affidavit given by the assessee. 3. I have perused the contents of the affidavit and find merit in the same as the assessee had reasonable cause which prevented him from filing the instant appeal before this Tribunal in time as he was dependent upon the tax consultants ... speaking order in accordance with law. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and not to take adjournment unless otherwise required for reasonable cause, failing which the ld. CIT(A) shall be free to proceed in accordance with law. Finding of the CIT(A) is set aside and Grounds

Sanjay Ganpat Aher, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Nashik

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1629/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

days in filing of the appeals before him for all the three assessment years on the ground that the assessee could not explain any reasonable cause to his satisfaction for the delay in filing of the appeals. We find that in quantum proceedings, the Tribunal condoned the delay

Sanjay Ganpat Aher, Nashik vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Nashik

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1628/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: Smt. Deepa KhareFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Desai, Addl. CIT, DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 270ASection 271(1)(c)

days in filing of the appeals before him for all the three assessment years on the ground that the assessee could not explain any reasonable cause to his satisfaction for the delay in filing of the appeals. We find that in quantum proceedings, the Tribunal condoned the delay