← 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

Mr. Jagdish Parshad, Ludhiana vs. ITO, Ward-1(4), Ludhiana

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 426/CHANDI/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh16 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT, DR

sought an adjournment. At that stage, the Ld. DR submitted that the present appeal was not accompanied by any affidavit or application for condonation of delay, despite there being a delay of more than 1344 days in filing the appeal. 4. In response, the Ld. AR submitted that the Authorised ... available on record. That on 15/04/2025, after the matter was heard on 09/04/2025 by the Bench, the assessee had sent a request for condonation of delay along with the affidavit which is to the following effect: 4 6 8. We have perused the material available on record and find that

Hiralal Dayaram Thakkar, Ahmedabad vs. DCIT Central Circle-2(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 2207/AHD/2024[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Ahmedabad16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 250

barred by184 days. The date of service/communication of order in Column 3(c) not correctly filled in and the petition and/or affidavit for condonation of delay in filing the appeal is not uploaded. From the perusal of the Form No.3, column no.3(c), date of service of communication

Penta Aqua Private Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The ITO, Ward-3(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 1838/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. BRR KUMAR (Vice President), SHRI T.R SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member)

small delay of 33 days in filing the appeal. 2. That on facts, and in law, the learned NFAC ought to have condoned the delay, admitted the appeal and decided the appeal on merits. 3. The appellant craves liberty to add, alter, amend any ground of appeal. 3. On going ... appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee since the assessee failed to furnish sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that, given an opportunity, all the details/clarification/explanation would be provided to the revenue

Akash Fishmeal & Fishoil Private Limited, Sindhudurg vs. Income Tax Officer, Kolhapur

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

ITA 2496/PUN/2024[AY 2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Pune16 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)

specified u/s 139(1) of the Act results in denial of concessional rate of tax to such person. 3 However, an option of condonation of delay in filing Form 10-IC may be exercised, if a domestic Company e-filed Form 10-IC late by the Appropriate Authority of Income ... filing the Form 10-IC (not filed yet) and claiming the benefit of charging of tax at lower rates. An option of condonation of delay in filing the Form 10-IC is available, but the appellant failed to take benefit of condonation of delay. Board is also of view that

Srinivas Reddy Yedla, Nalgonda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Suryapet

In the result, both the captioned appeals are disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 54/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Us:

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

Apex Court while setting aside the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhatisgarh, which had approved the declining of the condonation of delay of 166 days by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, had observed that a justice-oriented and liberal approach should be adopted while considering

Srinivas Reddy Yedla, Nalgonda vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Suryapet

In the result, both the captioned appeals are disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 53/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 69A

Apex Court while setting aside the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhatisgarh, which had approved the declining of the condonation of delay of 166 days by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, had observed that a justice-oriented and liberal approach should be adopted while considering

Asif Ali Mohd, Mahabubnagar vs. ITO., Ward-1, Mahabubnagar

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

ITA 408/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri P Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 44ASection 69A

there is a delay of 128 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for condonation of delay to the effect that the order of the learned CIT(A) was not served upon the assessee and that the order has been sent ... interest of justice. 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the reasons explained by the assessee in his affidavit for condonation of delay of 128 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. We find that there is a ‘sufficient cause’ for the assessee in not filing

Asif Ali Mohd, Mahabubnagar vs. ITO., Ward-1, Mahabubnagar

In the result, ITA.No.407/Hyd

ITA 407/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri P Vinod, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ranjan Agrawala, Sr. AR
Section 143(2)Section 144(1)Section 147Section 148Section 282Section 44ASection 69A

there is a delay of 128 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. The assessee filed an affidavit explaining the reasons for condonation of delay to the effect that the order of the learned CIT(A) was not served upon the assessee and that the order has been sent ... interest of justice. 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the reasons explained by the assessee in his affidavit for condonation of delay of 128 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal. We find that there is a ‘sufficient cause’ for the assessee in not filing

Mahesh Yadav Alam, Secunderabad vs. ITO., Ward-15(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the captioned appeals are disposed of in terms of the aforesaid observations

ITA 406/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Us:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 234ASection 69

Shri Rajan Agrawala, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (for short ‘Ld. DR’) did not raise any objection to the seeking of the condonation of delay involved in filing of the present appeal. 5. We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties qua the issue of delay involved

Mahesh Yadav Alam, Secunderabad vs. ITO., Ward-15(1), Hyderabad

In the result, both the captioned appeals are disposed of in

ITA 405/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2013-14
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 234ASection 69

Shri Rajan Agrawala, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (for short ‘Ld. DR') did not raise any objection to the seeking of the condonation of delay involved in filing of the present appeal. 5. We have heard the Ld. Authorized Representatives of both the parties qua the issue of delay involved

Vasantha Laxmi Veerapaneni, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1246/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA K HanmandlooFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. AR
Section 115BSection 143Section 147Section 154

there is a delay of 25 days in filing the instant appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition seeking for condonation of delay explaining the reasons. We are satisfied with the reasons furnished by the assessee. We, therefore, condone the delay of 25 days in filing

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle1-(2), Hyderabad vs. M/S. Vpr Mining Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad

Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee

ITA 90/HYD/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: Shri S K Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: MS. M. Narmada, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 153A

delay of 51 days in filing the instant appeal before the Tribunal. The learned CIT-DR has filed a petition for condonation of delay contending, inter alia, that the delay has been occurred due to administrative reasons which are beyond the control. She, therefore, submitted that the delay ... with the reasons explained by the Learned DR in filing the appeal before the Tribunal with a delay of 51 days. We, therefore, condone the delay of 51 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal as under. 6. Briefly stated facts

Smt. Shanti Devi Mehrwah, Haryana vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed at the behest of the assessee to settle the issue under VSVS

ITA 6039/DEL/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Apr 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekdcit, Ltu, Circle 1 & 2, Vs. India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, Great Eastern Centre, New Delhi. 70, Nehru Place, Ifci Tower, New Delhi – 110 019. (Pan : Aabci7552F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Ved Jain, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Dharm Veer Singh, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 09.10.2025 Date Of Order : 09.10.2025 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman: 1. The Revenue Has Filed Appeal Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals),-44, New Delhi [For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)] Dated 29.06.2018 For Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. At The Time Of Hearing, Ld. Ar For The Assessee Submitted That Since The Assessee Has Settled The Issue Under Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme, 2024 (In Short ‘Vsvs’), Hence, The Appeal Filed By The Revenue Has Become Infructuous & Deserves To Be Dismissed As Infructuous. In This Regard

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharm Veer Singh, CIT DR

appeals in the event assessee’s declaration made under VSVS is not accepted, the Registry shall not insist for filing of application for condonation of delay, if the Miscellaneous Application for recalling the order is filed beyond time on account of delay in communication of outcome under VSVS. [Revenue

Harikrishna Jewels, Surat vs. Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat

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

ITA 354/SRT/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Surat15 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.354/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 (Physical Court Hearing) Harikrishna Jewels, Principal Commissioner Of 201, Sunstar Building, Opp. बनाम/ Income Tax-1,, Surat, Room New Patidar Bhavan, No.123, Aaykar Bhawan, Near Vs. Mahidharpura, Surat-395 Majura Gate, Opp. New Civil 003 Hospital, Surat -395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aagfh 3864 F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Rasesh Shah, Ca राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Ravi Kant Gupta, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 10.02.2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 15.04.2025

Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 148Section 263

Ld.AR) for the assessee submits that there was delay of 358 days in filing appeal before Tribunal. The appellant has filed application for condonation of delay in filing appeal in respect of order u/s 263 of the Act of the Ld.PCIT dated 25.03.2022. It is submitted that order ... direct appeal before Tribunal, appeal was not filed. 3. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue opposed the application for condonation of delay. He submitted that the reasons given by the appellant could not constitute sufficient cause for condonation of delay. He requested to reject the condonation

The Bsnl Emp Ccs Limited No Z 613, Chilakaluripeta vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 406/VIZ/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Aparna Villuri, SR-DR

applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in rejecting the application filed for condonation of delay of 1479 days in filing the appeal and thus dismissing the appeal in limine. 3. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing ... applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in rejecting the application filed for condonation of delay of 524 days in filing the appeal and thus dismissing the appeal in limine. 3. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing

The Bsnl Enpc Ccs Limited No Z 613, Chilakaluripeta vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1), Guntur

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 405/VIZ/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Smt. A. Aruna, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Dr. Aparna Villuri, SR-DR

applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in rejecting the application filed for condonation of delay of 1479 days in filing the appeal and thus dismissing the appeal in limine. 3. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing ... applicable to the facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) is not justified in rejecting the application filed for condonation of delay of 524 days in filing the appeal and thus dismissing the appeal in limine. 3. Any other grounds may be urged at the time of hearing

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Churu vs. ITO TDS-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 266/JPR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

days in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation of delay with following prayers: Sub: Prayer for condo nation of Delay Honble Sir, 1. In this connection it is submitted that the applicant is a Banking financial ... Land & Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has advocated for a very liberal approach while considering a case for condonation of delay. The following observations of the Hon'ble Court are notable: "The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting section

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Churu vs. ITO TDS-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 265/JPR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

days in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation of delay with following prayers: Sub: Prayer for condo nation of Delay Honble Sir, 1. In this connection it is submitted that the applicant is a Banking financial ... Land & Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has advocated for a very liberal approach while considering a case for condonation of delay. The following observations of the Hon'ble Court are notable: "The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting section

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Churu vs. ITO, TDS (3), Jaipur

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 264/JPR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

days in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the Id. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation of delay with following prayers: Sub: Prayer for condo nation of Delay Honble Sir, 1. In this connection it is submitted that the applicant is a Banking financial ... Land & Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has advocated for a very liberal approach while considering a case for condonation of delay. The following observations of the Hon'ble Court are notable: "The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting section

Oriental Bank of Commerce, Churu vs. ITO(TDS)-3, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 263/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur15 Apr 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Sh. Shrawan Kumar Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 5

days in filing of the appeal by the assessee for which the Id. AR of the assessee filed an application for condonation of delay with following prayers: Sub: Prayer for condo nation of Delay Honble Sir, 1. In this connection it is submitted that the applicant is a Banking financial ... Land & Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji & Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has advocated for a very liberal approach while considering a case for condonation of delay. The following observations of the Hon'ble Court are notable: "The legislature has conferred the power to condone delay by enacting section