← 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

Three Seasons Exim Limited, Kakinada vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Kakinada

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

ITA 94/VIZ/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri S. Balakrishnanआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.94/Viz/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2028-19 ) Three Season Exim Ltd Vs. Income Tax Officer Kakinada Ward-1 Pan:Aafct1751M Kakinada (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri G.V.N. Hari, Advocate राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 17/07/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 25/07/2025 आदेश/Order Per Vijay Pal Raothis Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 29/02/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2018-19. 2. There Is A Delay Of 291 Days In Filing The Present Appeal Before This Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed A Petition For Condonation Of Delay Which Is Also Supported By An Affidavit Duly Signed By The Director Of The Assessee Company. The Learned Ar Of Page 1 Of 8

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Satyasai Rath, CIT(DR)

There is a delay of 291 days in filing the present appeal before this Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay which is also supported by an affidavit duly signed by the Director of the assessee company. The learned AR of Page ... appeal of the assessee be admitted for adjudication on merits. 3. On the other hand, the learned DR has opposed the condonation of delay and submitted that the delay of 291 days is an inordinate delay in filing the appeal and the assessee has failed to explain any reasonable cause

Ganesh Transports, Vijayawada vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 480/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 479/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Ganesh Transports Vs. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex Flat No. 504, Umamaheswari Towers West Ibrahimpatnam M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 521456 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aaifm6717G] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 480/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Ganesh Transports Vs. Asst. Cit – Circle – 1(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex Flat No. 504, Umamaheswari Towers West Ibrahimpatnam M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 521456 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaifm6717G] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Mv Prasad, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

with a delay of 179 days. Ld. CIT(A) by relying on various judicial pronouncements did not consider the petition for condonation of delay, thereby dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee filed appeals before us with ... opinion that the assessee has reasonable and sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeals by 21 days. Accordingly, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits. Page. No 3 I.T.A.No. 479 & 480/VIZ/2024 Ganesh Transports ITA No. 479/VIZ/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) – Quantum Appeal 5. Assessee

Ganesh Transports, Vijayawada vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Vijayawada

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 479/VIZ/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 479/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Ganesh Transports Vs. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex Flat No. 504, Umamaheswari Towers West Ibrahimpatnam M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 521456 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aaifm6717G] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No. 480/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2015-16) Ganesh Transports Vs. Asst. Cit – Circle – 1(1) Cr Building, 1St Floor Annex Flat No. 504, Umamaheswari Towers West Ibrahimpatnam M.G. Road, Vijayawada – 520002 Vijayawada – 521456 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh [Pan: Aaifm6717G] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri Mv Prasad, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Aparna Villuri, Sr.Ar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)

with a delay of 179 days. Ld. CIT(A) by relying on various judicial pronouncements did not consider the petition for condonation of delay, thereby dismissed the appeal of the assessee. 4. On being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), assessee filed appeals before us with ... opinion that the assessee has reasonable and sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeals by 21 days. Accordingly, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeals on merits. Page. No 3 I.T.A.No. 479 & 480/VIZ/2024 Ganesh Transports ITA No. 479/VIZ/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16) – Quantum Appeal 5. Assessee

Bala Venkata Shiva Satya Naga Raju Mantena, Kalla Mandalam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Bhimavaram

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

ITA 174/VIZ/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jul 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपीलसं./I.T.A.No.174/Viz/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2013-14) Bala Venkata Shiva Satya Naga Vs. Income Tax Officer – Ward – 1 Raju Mantena Bhimavaram 2-272/3, Malavani Thippa West Godavari District Andhra Pradesh Kaluvapudi – 534236 Kalla Mandalam West Godavari District Andhra Pradesh [Pan:Aocpm1009D] (अपीलधर्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) करदाता का प्रतततितित्व/ Assessee Represented By : Shri K.Siva Ram Kumar, Ca राजस्व का प्रतततितित्व/ Department Represented By : Dr.Satyasai Rath, Cit(Dr)

Section 147Section 148

filing of the appeal, the Ld. AR drew our attention to the affidavit filed by the assessee along with a petition seeking for condonation of delay and read out the contents of the petition which is as under: - “1. The petitioner is the Appellant in the appeal mentioned above ... Appeal before the Hon'ble Tribunal was due by 15.3.2024). 8. It is prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to condone the delay and pray that the Appeal be admitted and taken on record, as otherwise great hardship and insufferable injustice will be caused to the petitioner herein

Kota Vipassana Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 557/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपील सं./ITA No. 257 & 557/JP/2025 U/S 12AB & 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year : 2025-26 Kota Vipassana Trust बनाम The CIT (Exemption) Vs. Jaipur 1, Dhammathali, Via Sisodiya Rani Ka Bagh Galta Ji Road, Jaipur – 302 002 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAETK 8352 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Shailesh Mantri, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

relating to Section 80G of the Act for which the Secretary of the Trust has filed an affidavit dated 07-4-2025 for condonation of delay giving therein following reasoning. ‘’1. That the assessee had applied for registration u/s 12A and approval u/s 80G of the Income ... Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs Katiji (1987 – 2 SCC 107) that a liberal approach should be adopted in condoning te delays where sufficient cause is shown, particularly when the delay is not deliberate and the party has acted in good faith.The assessee submits that the reason

Kota Vipassana Trust, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 257/JPR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Jul 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM आयकरअपील सं./ITA No. 257 & 557/JP/2025 U/S 12AB & 80G of the Act निर्धारणवर्ष / Assessment Year : 2025-26 Kota Vipassana Trust बनाम The CIT (Exemption) Vs. Jaipur 1, Dhammathali, Via Sisodiya Rani Ka Bagh Galta Ji Road, Jaipur – 302 002 स्थायीलेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAETK 8352 P अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent निर्धारिती की ओरसे / Assesseeby : Shri Shailesh Mantri, CA राजस्व की ओरसे /Revenue

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Mantri, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Alka Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

relating to Section 80G of the Act for which the Secretary of the Trust has filed an affidavit dated 07-4-2025 for condonation of delay giving therein following reasoning. ‘’1. That the assessee had applied for registration u/s 12A and approval u/s 80G of the Income ... Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition vs Katiji (1987 – 2 SCC 107) that a liberal approach should be adopted in condoning te delays where sufficient cause is shown, particularly when the delay is not deliberate and the party has acted in good faith.The assessee submits that the reason

Y.Anthonysamy, Panruti vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4, Cuddalore

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

ITA 1579/CHNY/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 1579/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2011-12 Shri Y. Anthonisamy, The Income Tax Officer, 41-Andavar Nagar, Vs. Ward 4, 1St Street, Panikankuppan, Cuddalore. Panruti – 607 106. Pan: Aokpa 3874N (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri Hitesh, Advocate For Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Cit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 23.07.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 25.07.2025

For Appellant: Shri Hitesh, Advocate for Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, CIT
Section 144Section 250

filed before ITAT on or before 28.02.2025. However, :- 2 -: the appeal was filed belatedly on 30.05.2025. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation of delay and affidavit stating there in the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated is that the assessee inadvertently missed to file ... filing this appeal before the Tribunal. We also find that the assessee has got a prima facie case on merits. Hence, we condone the delay in filing the appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. 3. At the very outset, we notice that the order passed

V.C. Medical, Educational and Charitable Trust, Palani vs. ITO, Ward-1, Dindigul

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

ITA 1114/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1114/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 V.C. Medical, Educational & Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Charitable Trust, 72-B, Dindugal Ward 1, Road, Palani 624 601. Dindigul. [Pan:Aaatv4282H] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.07.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 25.07.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.01.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Mumbai For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. We Find That This Appeal Is Filed With A Delay Of 21 Days. The Assessee Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons. Upon Hearing Both The Parties & On Examination Of The Said Affidavit, We Find The Reasons Stated By The Assessee Are Bonafide, Which Really

For Appellant: Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 154

year 2021-22. 2. We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 21 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee ... drew our attention to the written submissions and submits that the delay condonation petition dated 16.11.2024 was allowed by the ld. CIT(E) condoning the delay in filing Form 10B under section 119(2)(b) of the Act and referred to enclosure 1. He submits that the assessee is entitled