“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

Secured Home Finance Limited, Howrah vs. P.C.I.T. - 5, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2059/KOL/2024[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Mar 2025AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194CSection 263

assessee could not be suffered a lot because of ignorance of the tax consultants. The ld. Counsel prays to admit his appeal by condoning the delay. 3. The Ld. D.R did not raise any objection in condoning the delay. 4. Going over the judicial pronouncement with respect to condonation

Secured Home Finance Limited, Howrah vs. P.C.I.T. - 5, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 2058/KOL/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Mar 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 194CSection 263

M/S. Stratus Commodities Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 1(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1952/KOL/2024[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Mar 2025AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am & Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Jm]

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148(2)Section 250Section 68

delay in filing the appeal may be condoned and it may be adjudicated. The ld. DR on the other hand opposed the condonation of delay that the notices and appellate order was sent on the email id of the assessee 2 M/s. Stratus Commodities P. ltd., AY 2010-11 nonetheless

Sys Santhwanam, Nilgiris vs. ITO, Ward-1, Ooty

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

ITA 2747/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai25 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr.A. Sasikumar, CIT

Section 12ASection 143(1)

benefit under Chapter-III of the Act, for any reason viz due to belated filing of RoI or for non-filing of the condonation of delay in respect of belated filing of Audit Report, etc, still the assessee University’s gross receipts can’t be brought ... needs to be excluded; and noticing that delay after that is less than ‘150’ days, considering the overall facts noted (supra), we condone the delay in filing appeal before the Ld.CIT(A); and further note that even though assessee doesn’t enjoy in this relevant AY 2019-20, section

Harsha Mukesh Vora, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 42(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, with this direction appeal of the assessee is allowed for statical purpose

ITA 623/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawalharsha Mukesh Vora Income Tax Officer 42(1)(2) 22, Vora Palace, M.G. Road, Vs. Kautilya Bhavan, Bandra Kurla Near Dena Bank, Kandivali West, Complex (Bkc), Mumbai 400067 Mumbai 400051 Pan No. Aaopv0839L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue Assessee Represented By Shri Priyank Ghia A/W. Simoni Shah Department Represented By Shri Nihar Ranjan Samal, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing 20/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25/03/2025 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act. Per: Pawan Singh: 1. This Appeal By Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac)/ Ld. Cit(A) Dated 22.03.2023 For Assessment Year 2012-13 For Assessment Year (Ay 2012-13). 2. Rival Submissions Of Both The Parties Have Been Heard & Record Perused. The Learned Authorised Representative (Ld Ar) Of The Assessee Submit That While Filing Appeal Before Cit(A), The Assessee Has Given Email Address “Voramaulik @Yahoo.Com”. However, No Notice Was Sent Through Such Email. Notice Under Section 250 Of The Act Was Sent By Ld. Cit(A) At Different Email I.E. Prajapati.Ca@Gamil.Com. Copy Of Screen Shot Of Itba Portal Is Placed On Record. The Said Email Belongs To Her Earlier Chartered Accountant (Ca), Who Has Not Informed The Assessee Or Her Present Ca Thus, The Assessee Could Not Make Compliance In Time & Ultimately Appeal Of The Assessee Was Dismissed

Section 250Section 250(6)Section 254(1)

coming to know that appeal of the assessee has been dismissed by ld CIT(A), yet the assessee filed her affidavit for condonation of delay in filing appeal before Tribunal. The Ld. AR. the assessee submits that the assessee has good case on merit and is likely to succeed ... other hand, the Ld. Sr. DR. for the revenue submit that assessee is relying on self-revenue story about reasonable cost for condonation of delay. The assessee has not explained the delay properly thus, appeal of the assessee may not be admitted. In alternative submissions

Ajay Dalsukhlal Goradia, Mumbai vs. Jurisdiction Ward 23(1)(6), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for

ITA 217/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Anil Sathe, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishn Kedia, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

there is a huge gap between the medical exigencies and filling of appeal therefore the Assessee is not entitled for any relief qua condonation of delay. 4. We have given thoughtful considerations to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. Admittedly from the medical documents referred to above ... instant appeal. Hence, considering the reasons stated by the Assessee, as genuine and bonafide we, for the substantial justice, are inclined to condone the delay. Thus, the delay is condoned. 5. Now coming to the merits of the case, we observe that in the instant case, the Assessing Officer

Chandru Shewakram Watwani HUF, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 24(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 6661/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankarassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Devendra Jain, Ld. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Mahesh Pamnani, Ld. Sr. D.R

Section 24ASection 250

conduct of the Assessee is apparent, as of non-compliant attitude and thus the Assessee is not entitled for any leniency qua condonation of delay. 4. We have given thoughtful considerations to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. The Hon’ble Apex Court in the case ... barred by time, then the Tribunal could not have dealt with the merits of the matter. The Hon’ble Apex Court somehow condoned the delay of 150 days in preferring first appeal, subject to the payment of Rs. 25,000/- by way of cost to 3 Chandru Shewakram Watwani

Ameesh Chandrakant Shah, Mumbai vs. ITO, WD 24(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for

ITA 6264/MUM/2024[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhshri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri Pritesh MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR

Section 133(6)Section 254(1)

well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal on the ground of non-filing application for condonation of delay of 38 days in filing appeal. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned ... dismissing the appeal without giving notice to the appellant regarding the dismissal of appeal on the ground of non-filing application for condonation of delay in filing appeal. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the Learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that

Stree Mandal Bombay, Mumbai vs. ITO Exemption Ward 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 6242/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pawan Singhshri Girish Agrawalassessment Year : 2016-17 Stree Mandal Bombay, 138, V.P. Road, Sikka Nagar, Maharashtra - 400004. Pan No. Aabts7861A ……………. Appellant

For Appellant: Shri Ashok Mehta-CA/ ARFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, Sr. DR

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 245Section 250Section 254(1)

year 2016-17. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: Stree Mandal Bombay. 1. The Learned CIT Appeals erred in not condoning the delay for reasons beyond the assesses control as the order u/s. 143(1) was received in the spam folder. 2. The Learned CIT Appeals erred ... granting enough opportunity of being heard and not issuing Show Cause Notice for rejecting the condonation of delay. 3. The Learned Assessing Officer at CPC Bangalore erred in assessing total income of Rs. 20,21,370/- instead of Rs. 2,11,600/- as represented by the assessee. 4. The Learned

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-16(1), Mumbai vs. Viacom18 Media Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal and the cross objection are dismissed

ITA 5670/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Prabhash Shankar, Am Asst. Cit-16(1) Viacom18 Media Private Limited 6Th Floor, Zion Biz World, Room No. 439, Aaykar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Marine Lines, Vs. Subash Road A, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400 020 S.O., Mumbai – 400 057

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Vora/For Respondent: Shri Ashish Heliwal

Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 69A

Media Private Limited 2. The Registry has notified delay of two days in filing the appeal. The Revenue has filed an application, seeking condonation of delay, which is kept on record. After considering the reason shown for delay in filing the appeal, we are satisfied that the delay

Shree Basaveshwar Vividha Uddeshgala Sahakari Sangha Niyamit, Yargatti vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1, Gokak

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

ITA 20/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji24 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G D Padmahshalii T A. Nos.20/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2017-18 ) Shree Basaveshwar Vividha Vs National Faceless Uddeshgala Sahakari. Assessment Centre, . Sangha Niyamit, Yaragatti Delhi- Hukkeri, . Belgaum-591309, Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Aaqas6113H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 144

assessee has filed the sufficient reasons for the delay dealt at para4 of the order. Whereas the CIT(A) has not condoned the delay and dismissed the assessee appeal in limine. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)order, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal ... No.20 /PAN/2025 Shree Basaveshwar Vividha Uddeshgala Sahakari Sangha Niyamit,Yargatti. compliance. Whereas the application U/sec 249(3) of the Act for condonation of delay in filling the appeal was filed before the CIT(A) dealt at Page 4 Para 4 of the order, explaining that due to Covid-19 pandemic

Krupa Vilas Gau Seva Trust, Kutch vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

ITA 163/RJT/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Mar 2025

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 162/Rjt/2023 (Assessment Year: Na) (Hybrid Hearing) Krupa Vilas Gau Seva Trust, Vs. Cit(Exemption), Kutch. Ahmedabad. Anjar, Anjar Road, Bhimasar Taluka Anjar, Kutch-370240. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaetk8746K (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) आयकर अपीलसं./Ita No. 163/Rjt/2023 (Assessment Year: Na) (Hybrid Hearing) Krupa Vilas Gau Seva Trust, Vs. Cit(Exemption), Kutch. Ahmedabad. Anjar, Anjar Road, Bhimasar Taluka Anjar, Kutch-370240. स्थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aaetk8746K (अपीलार्थी/Assessee) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) निर्धारितीकीओरसे/Assessee By : Shri Kalpesh Doshi, Ar राजस्वकीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Sanjay Punglia, Cit Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख / Date Of Hearing : 09/01/2025 घोषणाकीतारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 24/03/2025 1 | Page

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

activities, whichever is earlier. The time limits prescribed therein is mandatory and the Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No. 10AB. The assessee submitted a detailed reply before 8 | Page the ld, CIT(E) however, ld. CIT(E ) rejected ... appeal before us. 17. We have heard both the parties. Learned Counsel for the assessee, submitted that Tribunal has power to condone the delay, in filing the application. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the revenue relied on the findings of the ld.CIT(E).We note that

Krupa Vilas Gau Seva Trust, Kutch vs. CIT(Exemption), Ahmedabad

Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 162/RJT/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot24 Mar 2025

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinhaआयकरअपीलसं./Ita No. 162/Rjt/2023 (Assessment Year: Na) (Hybrid Hearing)

For Appellant: Shri Kalpesh Doshi, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Punglia, CIT DR

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)

activities, whichever is earlier. The time limits prescribed therein is mandatory and the Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No. 10AB. The assessee submitted a detailed reply before 8 | P a g e KRUPA VILAS GAU SEVA TRUST, KUTCH ... appeal before us. 17. We have heard both the parties. Learned Counsel for the assessee, submitted that Tribunal has power to condone the delay, in filing the application. However, on the other hand, ld. DR for the revenue relied on the findings of the ld.CIT(E).We note that

Shree Rajendra Suri Sah Sakh Santha Myd, Rajgarh, Dhar vs. The ITO, Dhar

ITA 792/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 28

considered by ITAT. Therefore, in present matters, the CIT(A) should be directed to give the benefit of ITAT’s order for condonation of delay and the CIT(A) be further directed to decide the assessee’s first-appeals on merit. Accordingly, Ld. AR prayed to re-store these matters ... days in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-14 & 1693 days in filing the appeal for A.Y.2014-15. The assesee has filed applications for condonation of delay which are supported by affidavits of the Chairman of the assessee society. Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that an FIR was registered