← 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

Premadevi Rameshchandra Agrawal, Jalna vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 Jalna, Jalna

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

ITA 599/PUN/2024[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Pune23 Jul 2024AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.599/Pun/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Tripathi
Section 144

assessment order was passed on 30.11.2016 presumed that there is a delay of 985 days in the absence of any petition for condonation of delay, dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of delay placing reliance on the following decisions : 1. Mohd. Ashfaq vs. State Transport Tribunal ... that there is a delay of 985 days and accordingly dismissed the appeal in limine in the absence of any petition for the condonation of delay. In the absence of any material on record indicating the contrary to what is stated by the assessee in Form No.35

Prem Prasad, Malda vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Malda

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

ITA 12/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 250

vide Appeal No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1057240315(1) dated 20.10.2023. 2. Along with the Appeal Memo, the assessee has also filed an application for condonation of delay as there is a delay of about 13 days in filing the appeal, wherein it has been stated as under: “1. That the appeal filed ... illness the appeal was not filed within the due date. 4. In light of above circumstances, it is requested before your lordship to condone the delay in the present case as the circumstances were beyond the control of the assessee. 5. That the memo of appeal has been filed

District Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)- 1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 547/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 131Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 26A

Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal 2. There is a delay of 320 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bhopal. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee ... leave to add or amend any grounds of appeal, if necessary, in the interest of justice under law. 10. The appellant prays to condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest

District Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)- 1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 546/IND/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 131Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 26A

Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal 2. There is a delay of 320 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bhopal. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee ... leave to add or amend any grounds of appeal, if necessary, in the interest of justice under law. 10. The appellant prays to condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest

District Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)- 1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 545/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 131Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 26A

Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal 2. There is a delay of 320 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bhopal. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee ... leave to add or amend any grounds of appeal, if necessary, in the interest of justice under law. 10. The appellant prays to condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest

District Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)- 1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 544/IND/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 131Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 26A

Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal 2. There is a delay of 320 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bhopal. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee ... leave to add or amend any grounds of appeal, if necessary, in the interest of justice under law. 10. The appellant prays to condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest

District Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)- 1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 543/IND/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 131Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 26A

Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal 2. There is a delay of 320 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bhopal. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee ... leave to add or amend any grounds of appeal, if necessary, in the interest of justice under law. 10. The appellant prays to condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest

District Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal, Bhopal vs. Income Tax Officer (TDS)-1, Bhopal

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 542/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 131Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 26A

Organisor Tribal Welfare Bhopal 2. There is a delay of 320 days in filing these appeals. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the Assistant Commissioner, Tribal Welfare, Bhopal. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee ... leave to add or amend any grounds of appeal, if necessary, in the interest of justice under law. 10. The appellant prays to condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest

Shri Ram Babu Singh, Indore vs. DCIT 1(1), Bhopal

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 328/IND/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanishri Ram Babu Singh, Dcit-1(1) C/O Sv Agrawal & Associates, Bhopal Dadi Dham, 24, Joy Builders Colony, Vs. Near Rafael Tower, Old Palasia, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aelps9945K Assessee By S/Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 15.05.2024 & 03.07.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 23 .07.2024

Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 80I

assessee has filed an affidavit to explain the cause of delay. We have heard the Ld. AR as well as Ld. DR on condonation of delay and carefully perused the contents of the affidavit filed by the assessee. The assessee has explained the cause of delay in para ... days in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice we condone the delay of 10 days in filing the present appeal. 4. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: 1.That on the facts

Raj Kumar Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3, Jaipur

Appeals are disposed of, for statistical purposes

ITA 921/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Bhardwaj (CIT) vk;dj
Section 143(3)Section 245HSection 271(1)(c)

assessment year 2010-11. The contention is that in the given circumstances. Learned CIT(A) should have entertained the appeals, while condoning the delay in filing thereof, but, the appeals have been dismissed being barred by limitation, and as such, the impugned orders be set aside and the matters ... particulars were furnished, they have no objection to the remand of the matters to Learned CIT(A) for disposal of the applications seeking condonation of delay afresh, provided that correct particulars are furnished in rectified Form No. 35 furnished in each appeal, and that too subject to costs

Raj Kumar Kandoi, Jaipur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2), Jaipur

Appeals are disposed of, for statistical purposes

ITA 816/JPR/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 Jul 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member), SHRI NARINDER KUMAR (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anil Bhardwaj (CIT) vk;dj
Section 143(3)Section 245HSection 271(1)(c)

assessment year 2010-11. The contention is that in the given circumstances. Learned CIT(A) should have entertained the appeals, while condoning the delay in filing thereof, but, the appeals have been dismissed being barred by limitation, and as such, the impugned orders be set aside and the matters ... particulars were furnished, they have no objection to the remand of the matters to Learned CIT(A) for disposal of the applications seeking condonation of delay afresh, provided that correct particulars are furnished in rectified Form No. 35 furnished in each appeal, and that too subject to costs

Rajendra Singa Dushyanth Singh, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 990/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Maru, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 17

condonation of the delay and decide the issue afresh on merit. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR before vehemently opposed to condone the delay and relied on the order of the authorities below. 6. We have perused the records and heard the rival submissions of both the sides ... Tribunal's view that there was no question of limitation in such cases, was not correct yet the AAC was right in condoning the delay and entertaining the appeal.” 6.1 From the above, we note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court was pleased to condone the delay

Rajendra Singa Dushyanth Singh, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 989/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan K

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja Maru, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 17

condonation of the delay and decide the issue afresh on merit. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR before vehemently opposed to condone the delay and relied on the order of the authorities below. 6. We have perused the records and heard the rival submissions of both the sides ... Tribunal's view that there was no question of limitation in such cases, was not correct yet the AAC was right in condoning the delay and entertaining the appeal.” 6.1 From the above, we note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court was pleased to condone the delay

Padubidri Co-Operative Agricultural Society, Udupi vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Udupi

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

ITA 1147/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Soundararajan Kassessment Years : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar S.V, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian S, JCIT
Section 250Section 57Section 80Section 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(2)(d)

with respect to the interest income from co-operative banks/societies. 3. The assessee before us has filed an application for condonation of delay of 52 days which is supported by the Affidavit. It was stated in the application that at the relevant point of time, the order passed ... assessee, the present appeal was preferred to the ITAT with the delay of 52 days. Accordingly, the ld. AR prayed to condone the delay in filing the appeal and decide the issue on merit of the case. 5. On the other hand, the ld. DR did not raise any objection

Motilal Lachhmandas Rijhwani, Thane vs. ITO, WD-2(2), Kalyan

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 2256/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Bhadresh Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69A

There is a delay of 136 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay along with the affidavit and prayed for condonation of delay. The ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee with regard to the condonation submitted that the assessee ... related matter, the ld. AR prayed that the delay may be condoned. 4. The ld. DR on the other hand vehemently opposed the condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Having heard both the parties and perused the material on record, we are of the view

Mohammed Anwar Ali, Kolkata vs. The Income Tax Officer (Int. Tax.) 1(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4379/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Ghhajed, CAFor Respondent: Shri R. R. Makwana, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 69A

clearly mentioned in Form No. 35 itself and also filed during the course of appellate proceedings which ought to have been considered and condone the delay which was due to reasonable and sufficient cause. The appellant had also submitted an online response to the deficiency letter dt. 31.03.2021 served ... delay of 96 days in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Since the assessee has not filed any petition for condoning the delay before the CIT(A), the appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) without condoning the delay. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against

Madhuri Chinthamaneni, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 12(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 338/HYD/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Jul 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahamed, DR
Section 10Section 144Section 80DSection 80T

facts of the case. ITA No.338/Hyd/2024 2 2. The Id. First Appellate Authority is not justified in rejecting the petition filed for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 3. The Id. First Appellate Authority is not justified in not considering the appeal on merits. 4. The Id. First Appellate ... There was delay of 209 days in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) without ITA No.338/Hyd/2024 3 condoning the delay in filing the appeal, dismissed the appeal of the assessee in limine. 5. Feeling aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee

M/S. Blueprint Commercial Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 5(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 945/KOL/2024[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.945/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Section 147Section 250Section 68

Kolkata dated 28.09.2021. 2. Registry has informed that the appeal of the assessee is time barred by 231 days and an application for condonation of delay has been placed in file and on perusal of the same indicates that the said delay has arisen on account of careless approach ... handling I.T.A. No. 945/Kol/2024 Blueprint commercial Pvt. Ltd. AY : 2013-14 accounts and income tax matters. I, therefore, in the interest of justice condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 3. When the case was called for hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, I however, proceed

Simlon Samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity Limited, Vill - Simlon, Kalna-I vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC Bengaluru, Karnataka

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 568/KOL/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.568/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2019-2020

Section 10ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 147Section 250Section 80ASection 80ISection 80P

situation certainly would have been against the assessee subject to the approval by the authorities for condonation of delay in filing the return. However, before us, the issue is regarding prima facie adjustment made u/s. 143(1)(a)(v) of the Act and as discussed above, such power of making

Putul Biswas, Nadia vs. ACIT, Cir. 41, Nadia

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

ITA 316/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jul 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No.316/Kol/2024 Assessment Years: 2017-18 Putul Biswas……………………………....................…...……………....Appellant Bagula Ashrampara, P.O. Bagula, Nadia W.B – 741502. [Pan: Aegpb7395R] Vs. Acit, Circle-41, Nadia..…….……………............................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri Anil Kochar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Shri Subhro Das, Addl. Cit-Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : July 10, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : July 22, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 07.12.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. There Is A Delay Of 14 Days In Filing The Present Appeal. A Separate Application For Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Which Is Duly Supported By An Affidavit Of The Assessee. Considering The Submissions Made In The Affidavit, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned.

Section 250

hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). 2. There is a delay of 14 days in filing the present appeal. A separate application for condonation of delay has been filed, which is duly supported by an affidavit of the assessee. Considering the submissions made in the affidavit, the delay in filing