“ condonation of delay ”

Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. v. Mst. Katiji & Ors.

Delay in filing appeals, when supported by sufficient or justifiable cause, should be condoned with a liberal approach to ensure substantial justice. This principle prioritizes the cause of justice over mere technicalities.

2 SCC 107 · 1987 · Supreme Court

451

Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy

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.

7 SCC 123 · 1998 · Supreme Court

368

Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr

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.

398 ITR 250 · 2017 · High Court

291

Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others

This case is cited as an authority supporting the condonation of delay in filing income tax appeals, particularly when an assessee presents a request for such condonation.

118 ITR 507 · 1979 · Supreme Court

268

Inder Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh

For condoning delay, the term 'sufficient cause' must be interpreted liberally and purposively to advance justice. Delay not tainted by mala fides, gross negligence, or recklessness, and based on honestly obtained legal advice, constitutes sufficient cause.

2025 INSC 382 · 2025 · Supreme Court

267

253 ITR 798 · 2002 · Supreme Court

Non-deliberate procedural delays caused by circumstances beyond control must be condoned in the interest of substantial justice, even if the delay is significant, such as over 1500 days.

Vedabhai v. Santaram

262

Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT

When substantial justice and technical considerations are in conflict, substantial justice should be prioritized. Condoning delay requires a cautious approach without malafide or dilatory tactics, and 'sufficient cause' should be interpreted liberally to advance substantial justice.

280 ITR 357 · 2006 · High Court

182

ITA 5679/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2019-20

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.

Judgments citing condonation of delay

Sahyadri Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd., Vashi, Navi Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Vashi

In the result, the Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes for decision on merit

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2019-20 M/S. Sahyadri Sahakari Income Tax Officer, Patpedhi Ltd., Ward No.28(3)(1), Bldg No.D-1/0-6, Sector 1, Vs. 3Rd Floor, Tower No.06, Vashi, Vashi Railway Station Bldg., Navi Mumbai – 400 703 Vashi, Pan: Aadas1023P Navi Mumbai – 400703 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri Sushant Alme, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Sunil Mathews, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.07.2025, Impugned Herein, Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Addl/Jcit (A) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2019-20. 2. Considering The Peculiar Fact That The Ld. Commissioner Has Dismissed The Appeal Of The Assessee In Limine For Want Of Limitation, The Application For Adjournment Filed By The Assessee, Stands Rejected.

For Appellant: Shri Sushant Alme, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Mathews, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 80P

delay, however, not found the same as acceptable on the reasons that it is well settled with the reasons stated thereof for condonation of delay should be acceptable. In other words, the reasons adduced must be properly pleaded, convincing and acceptable and explanation should be offered for condonation ... lack of bonafide, the delay in filing the appeal cannot be condoned. 4.1 Thus, on the aforesaid reasons, the Ld. Commissioner declined to condone the delay and in effect dismissed the appeal of the Assessee in limine. 3 M/s. Sahyadri Sahakari Patpedhi Ltd 5. At this juncture, the Ld. Counsel

Itech Cellcom Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 12(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5608/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

that the present appeal filed 4. by the assessee is time barred by 344 days and in this regard an affidavit for seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee, wherein it has been mentioned as under: We most respectfully submit the following for your kind consideration ... were severely constrained during the relevant period. 7. In view of the above, we most humbly request this Hon'ble Tribunal to kindly condone the delay and admit the appeal / submissions on record, so that the matter may be adjudicated on merits in the interest of justice. Itech Cellcom

Itech Cellcom Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 12(2)(1), Mumbai

ITA 5607/MUM/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

noticed that the present appeal filed by the assessee is time barred by 344 days and in this regard an affidavit for seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee, wherein it has been mentioned as under: We most respectfully submit the following for your kind consideration ... were severely constrained during the relevant period. 7. In view of the above, we most humbly request this Hon'ble Tribunal to kindly condone the delay and admit the appeal / submissions on record, so that the matter may be adjudicated on merits in the interest of justice

Itech Cellcom Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 12(2)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 5606/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

Nitika Rashmi Jhaveri, United Arab Emirates vs. Ward 42(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 5510/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosaina.Ys: 2012-13

ITA 5440/MUM/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2012-2013

dismissed 2. the appeal as the same was filed beyond the period of limitation and consequently while dismissing the application for condonation of delay, the appeal was also dismissed. 2 Nitika Rashmi Jhaveri., Mumbai. 3. We have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed on record ... revenue authorities. 4. From the records, we noticed that assessee has filed a detailed explanation thereby explaining the reason for seeking condonation of delay and for non compliance before the CIT(A). 5. Considering the entire factual position as explained before me to the effect that the assessee

Radhika Gupta, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 32(1)(4), Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosaina.Ys: 2012-13

ITA 5032/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

noticed that there is delay of 210 2. days in filing the present appeal and in this regard an application for seeking condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee, wherein it has been mentioned as under: 2 Radhika Gupta., Mumbai. I, Smt. Radhika Gupta, an adult Indian inhabitant ... justifiably and properly explaining the delay which occurred in filing the appeal and construing the expression" sufficient cause" liberally I am inclined to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore I condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. From

M/S. Lootcart.Com, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 22(2)(3), Mumbai

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2017-18 M/S. Lootcart.Com, Income Tax Officer Shop No.29, 3Rd Floor, Ward 22(2)(3), Hi-Life Mall, R.No.311, 3Rd Floor, Vs. P M Road, Piramal Chamber, Santacruz (W), Lal Baug, Mumbai – 400 054 Parel Mumbai – 400 012 Pan: Aaffl5361E (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri V.D. Parmar, Ld. A.R. Revenue By : Shri Pushkaraj Bhangepatil, Ld. Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing : 13.11.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.11.2025 O R D E R Per : Narender Kumar Choudhry: This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.11.2024, Impugned Herein, Passed By The National Faceless Appeal Center (Nfac)/ Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (In Short Ld. Commissioner) U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short ‘The Act’) For The A.Y. 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, It Is Observed That There Is A Delay Of 222 Days In Filing The Instant Appeal, On Which The Assessee By Filing Duly Sworn Affidavit Has Demonstrated The Peculiar Facts For Condonation Of Delay, Which Read As Under:

For Appellant: Shri V.D. Parmar, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Pushkaraj Bhangepatil, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 144Section 250Section 253(5)

days in filing the instant appeal, on which the Assessee by filing duly sworn affidavit has demonstrated the peculiar facts for condonation of delay, which read as under: “That your-good selves are empowered under section 253(5) of the Act to Condon the delay in filing appeal ... hereby humbly requested to kindly 2 M/s. Lootcart.com consider company's present petition sympathetically and condone the delay in filing appeal and admit the same.” Though the Ld. CIT DR refuted the claim of the Assessee qua condonation of delay, however, at last submitted that if the delay is condoned

Mr. Sachin Manoharmal Chopra, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 20(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 2081/MUM/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain

ITA 3849/DEL/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

appeal filed by the assessee as the same was filed beyond the period of limitation and consequently while dismissing the application for condonation of delay, the appeal was also dismissed. 2 Mr. Sachin manoharmal Chopra., Mumbai. 3. I have heard the counsels for both the parties, perused the material placed ... revenue authorities. 4. From the records, I noticed that assessee has filed a detailed explanation thereby explaining the reason for seeking condonation of delay. Whereas on the contrary Ld. DR relied upon the orders passed by revenue authorities. 5. Considering the entire factual position as explained before

Yuga Printpack Private Limited vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Fbd

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes as indicated above

Bench: SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK (Judicial Member), SHRI AVDHESH KUMAR MISHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 250(6)

more than 1050 days before the Ld. CIT(A). The reason being sufficient, therefore, it was prayed before the Ld. CIT(A) to condone the delay and decide the appeal on merits. Further, it is seen that despite of issue of several notices, assessee has failed to make any compliance ... Under these circumstances and the interest of justice, we find that the reason given by the assessee for delay has sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). As the Ld. CIT(A) has not decided the appeal of the assessee on merits

Late Chandra Kishore Mishra Through Legal Heir Alok Ranjan, Motihari vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, Delhi

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

ITA 287/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 250

Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 290 days. On behalf of the assessee, a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons being the assessee’s ill health and subsequent demise and the legal heir being unaware of the pending demand and proceedings has been ... assessee had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant appeal within the statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 287/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Late Chandra Kishore Mishra Through Legal Heir Alok Ranjan. 2. The assessee

Anjani Kumar, Patna vs. ITO, Ward-6(5), Patna

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

ITA 201/PAT/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Nov 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 592 days. The assessee has submitted a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons being the Counsel failing to appear before the Ld. CIT(A) on the given dates and has requested that the delay in filing ... that the assessee had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant appeal within statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 201/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Anjani Kumar. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal

Sunil Kumar, Patna vs. ITO, Ward- 6 (1), Patna

ITA 168/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

ITA 156/PAT/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Nov 2025AY 2021-2022

Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 342 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons. After perusing the same, we are satisfied that the assessee had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant appeal ... within the statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. ITA No.: 168/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Sunil Kumar. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without

Mithilesh Kumar Choubey, Patna vs. DCIT/ACIT Cen Cir2, Pat, Patna

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

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 250

Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 156 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons that he was unaware of the order passed u/s 250 of the Act by the Ld. CIT(A) and being a non-tech-savvy ... assessee had a reasonable and sufficient cause and was prevented from filing the instant appeal within the statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that

Kripa Shanker, Patna vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1), Patna

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

ITA 117/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 148Section 250Section 54

Registry has informed that the appeal is barred by limitation by 558 days. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay explaining the reasons that the order u/s 250 of the Act was never served upon the assessee nor on his e-mail and he was also ... prevented from filing the ITA No.: 117/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kripa Shanker. instant appeal within the statutory time limit. We, therefore, condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 509/JPR/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2021-22

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

ITA 508/JPR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

erred in a. stating that Appellant has took substantial time and adjournments during the appeal proceedings. b. in dismissing the appeal by not condoning the delay in filing appeal and thereby dismissing the appeal in liminie. C. In not following the directions of Hon'ble High Court in Civil Writ ... Court reads as follows: 3. There is no doubt in the eventuality of the petitioner filling an appeal accompanied by the application for condonation of delay, the same would be considered in accordance with the law, sympathetically. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

ITA 507/JPR/2025[A.Y. 2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025

erred in a. stating that Appellant has took substantial time and adjournments during the appeal proceedings. b. in dismissing the appeal by not condoning the delay in filing appeal and thereby dismissing the appeal in liminie. c. In not following the directions of Hon’ble High Court in Civil Writ ... Court reads as follows: 3. There is no doubt in the eventuality of the petitioner filling an appeal accompanied by the application for condonation of delay, the same would be considered in accordance with the law, sympathetically. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

ITA 506/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

erred in a. stating that Appellant has took substantial time and adjournments during the appeal proceedings. b. in dismissing the appeal by not condoning the delay in filing appeal and thereby dismissing the appeal in liminie. c. In not following the directions of Hon’ble High Court in Civil Writ ... Court reads as follows: 3. There is no doubt in the eventuality of the petitioner filling an appeal accompanied by the application for condonation of delay, the same would be considered in accordance with the law, sympathetically. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR

ITA 505/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

erred in a. stating that Appellant has took substantial time and adjournments during the appeal proceedings. b. in dismissing the appeal by not condoning the delay in filing appeal and thereby dismissing the appeal in liminie. c. In not following the directions of Hon’ble High Court in Civil Writ ... Court reads as follows: 3. There is no doubt in the eventuality of the petitioner filling an appeal accompanied by the application for condonation of delay, the same would be considered in accordance with the law, sympathetically. 4. The Commissioner (Appeals) shall make an endeavour to decide the appeal

Sonu Dusad, Jaipur vs. DCIT Central Circle, 1, Jaipur

In the results, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

Bench: This Tribunal Are As Under :

For Appellant: Sh. Mukesh Soni, AdvFor Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR