← All Phrases

“condonation of delay”

AppealsSection 249Section 24912,312 judgments

The decision most relied on for condonation of delay is Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (167 ITR 471), cited in 3,926 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on condonation of delay

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji
167 ITR 471 · 1987 · Supreme Court
3,926
citing judgments

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.

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.

Vishin Meghani v. DCIT & Anr
398 ITR 250 · 2017 · High Court
291
citing judgments

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.

Concord of India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Smt. Nirmala Devi and Others
118 ITR 507 · 1979 · Supreme Court
268
citing judgments

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.

Inder Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh
2025 INSC 382 · 2025 · Supreme Court
267
citing judgments

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
253 ITR 798 · 2002 · Supreme Court
262
citing judgments

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.

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.

Judgments citing condonation of delay

Shyama Sundar Samanta, Dhenkanal vs. The Income Tax Officer, Dhenkanal Ward, Dhenkanal

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

ITA 394/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.394/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Shyama Sundar Samanta Vs Ito, Dhenkanal Ward, Dhenkanal Nuapani Sahi, Hindol, Dhenakanal, 759022 Pan No. : Evopps 0425 Q (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

appeal of the assessee is barred by 70 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any serious ... objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay of 70 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 2 3. It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing

Bijay Kumar Panda, Balasore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Balasore

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

ITA 388/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.388/Ctk/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-2018) Bijay Kumar Panda Vs Ito, Ward-1, Balasore Barapada, Khanntapada, Balasore, 756043 Pan No. : Arrpp 6903 H (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri P.K.Mishra, Advocate राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 11/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 11/08/2025

For Appellant: Shri P.K.Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. DR

appeal of the assessee is barred by 308 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating therein sufficient reasons for delay, which are plausible and not found to be false. Ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any serious ... objection to condone the delay. Accordingly, delay of 308 days in filing the present appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 2 3. It was submitted by the ld AR that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee without providing

State Institute of Chidrens Literature, Trivandrum vs. ITO Ward 1(3), Trivandrum

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

ITA 539/COCH/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin11 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am Assessment Year: 2019-20 State Institue Of Childrens Literature .......... Appellant Sanskrit College Campus, Palayalam Thiruvananthapuram 695034 [Pan: Aajts9037Q] Vs. Ito, Ward - 1(3), Thiruvananthapuram .......... Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mathew Joseph, Ca Revenue By: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R. Date Of Hearing: 07.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.08.2025 O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Cit(A)] Dated 28.02.2025 For Assessment Year (Ay) 2019-20. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Society Setup By The Government Of Kerala Formed With The Objective Of Promotion Of Education & Literature, Promote Reading Habits & Promote Affinity Towards Culture Among Children. No Return Of Income Was Filed By The Appellant Society For Ay 2019-20. Based On The Information Available In The It Portal That Interest Of Rs. 21,37,898/- Was Received By The Appellant, The Ito, Ward-1(3)

For Appellant: Shri Mathew Joseph, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148

outset, I find that there is a delay in filing the present appeal by 86 days. The appellant filed a petition seeking condonation of delay on the ground that the delay had occurred on account of change of Chartered Accounts, who are looking after the income tax affairs ... appeal may be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for adjudication. Having regard to the averments made in the affidavit seeking condonation of delay, in the absence of any evidence contrary, I am 3 State Institue of Childrens Literature of the considered opinion that the appellant society is prevented