← 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

Cud Dt Public Health Dept Emp Co Op Society by Fc, Cuddalore vs. AO, Cuddalore

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

ITA 471/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.:471/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2019-20 M/S. Cud Dt Public Health Dept. The Income Tax Officer, Emp. Co-Op Society By Fc, Vs. Ward 2, No.4, Appavu Street, Cuddalore. Pudupallayam, Cuddalore H.O., Cuddalore – 607 001. Pan: Aacac 9724A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Shri G. Reddi Prakash, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16.06.2025

For Appellant: Shri G. Reddi Prakash, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sita Krishnamoorthy, JCIT
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 80P

There is a delay of 260 days in filing the appeal. The Secretary of the assessee’s society has filed affidavit for condonation of delay stating therein the reasons for belated filing of this appeal. The reasons stated in the affidavit for belated filing reads as follows:- 3. The delay ... present its case before this Hon’ble Tribunal. 5. It is therefore respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to condone the delay of 260 days in filing the appeal and admit the same for hearing and disposal on merits, in the interest of substantial justice

Shobha Devi, Patna vs. NFAC, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 395/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishraआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.395/Pat/2024 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-2017) Shobha Devi, Vs Ptn-W-30(91)/Nfac, Delhi 1 Wheeler Road, Ljp Office, Airport Road, Patna-800001 Pan No. :Acupd 2694 P (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : None राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 16/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 16/06/2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan, Jm This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Id. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 25.01.2025 For The Assessment Year 2016-2017. 2. The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Filed Belatedly By 36 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating Therein Sufficient Reasons For Delay, Which Are Not Found To Be False & The Ld.Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Serious Objection To It. Thus, We Condone The Delay In Filing The Present Appeal & Appeal Of The Assessee Is Admitted For Hearing. 3. None Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee, However An Application Dated 17.04.2025 Has Been Filed On Behalf Of The Assessee For Withdrawal Of The Appeal Stating Therein That The Assessee Has Availed Dtvst 2024

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr.DR

appeal of the assessee has been filed belatedly by 36 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay stating therein sufficient reasons for delay, which are not found to be false and the ld.Sr. DR also did not raise any serious objection ... Thus, we condone the delay in filing the present appeal and appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 3. None appeared on behalf of the assessee, however an application dated 17.04.2025 has been filed on behalf of the assessee for withdrawal of the appeal stating therein that the assessee

Shambhu Dasgupta, Dalkhola vs. Income Tax Officer, Raiganj

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

ITA 221/KOL/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.221/Kol/2025 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Shambhu Dasgupta Vs Income Tax Officer, It Office, Sbi Building, Subhaspally, Dalkhola, Karnojhora, Raiganj, Karandighi, Uttar Dinajpur, West Bengal-733201 Pan No. : Ciwpd 4351 D (अपीलार्थी /Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent) .. नििााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Chandan Sanghai, Ar राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/05/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 13/05/2025 आदेश / O R D E R The Present Appeal Is Directed At The Instance Of Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac Delhi Dated 18.11.2024 Passed For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. At The Outset, On Perusal Of The Appeal Record, I Find That The Appeal Of The Assessee Is Filed Belatedly By 10 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed An Application For Condonation Of Delay Supported With An Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay In Filing The Appeal. In The Said Affidavit, The Assessee Has Sworn That The Assessee Was Suffering From Some Health Issues From 04.01.2025 To 17.01.2025 & Was Under Medical Treatment During This Period, Which Caused The Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Tribunal Within The Stipulated Period. In Support Of The Same, The Assessee Has Also Enclosed Medical Certificate. Ld. Sr. Dr Also Did Not Raise Any Objection To Condone The Delay. Considering The Facts

For Appellant: Shri Chandan Sanghai, ARFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit Adhikary, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 69A

find that the appeal of the assessee is filed belatedly by 10 days. In this regard, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay supported with an affidavit stating sufficient reasons for delay in filing the appeal. In the said affidavit, the assessee has sworn that the assessee ... period. In support of the same, the assessee has also enclosed medical certificate. Ld. Sr. DR also did not raise any objection to condone the delay. Considering the facts 2 and circumstances of the case and the contentions made by the assessee in the affidavit supported with medical documents