← 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 180/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 179/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 178/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 177/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 176/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 175/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 174/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 173/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 172/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 171/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Bank of India, Nagpur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, TDS, Circle51(1), Nagpur

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

ITA 170/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy, (Through Physical Hearing)

Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250

treating the assessee in default for non-deduction of tax at source u/s 194A on interest paid/credited to its customers and also non-condonation of delay by the Id. CIT(A) in presenting the appeals before him. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case in the captioned appeals

Candid Industries Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 83/HYD/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar(Through Virtual Mode) & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.83/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2014-15) Candid Industries Limited Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Plot No.1, Survey No.308, Circle 1(1) Venkateswara Co- Hyderabad Operative, Industrial Estate, Jeedimetla, Hyderabad Pan:Aaace4493Q (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Mv Joshi, Ca Appeared For Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, Ca रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/04/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 29/04/2024

For Appellant: Shri MV Joshi, CA appeared for Shri P. MuraliFor Respondent: : Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR

Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

learned assessing officer, assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 163 days. The learned CIT(A) did not condone the delay and dismissed the appeal of assessee in limini. 6. Feeling aggrieved with the order of learned CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal ... before us. 7. The learned Counsel for the assessee referring to the petition for condonation of delay before the ld. CIT(A) submitted that the assessment order was passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the I.T. Act on 28.3.2022. The appeal was supposed to be filed with

Chandra Shekar Reddy Lattupalli, Ranga Reddy District vs. ITO Ward-9(4), Hyderabad

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

ITA 335/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं / Ita No. 335/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2017-18) Chandra Shekar Reddy Vs. Income Tax Officer, Lattupalli, Ward-9(4), Manchal Mandal, Hyderabad Ranga Reddy Dist., [Pan No. Adcpl3436A] अपीलधर्थी / Appellant प्रत्‍यर्थी / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Afzal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashish Kumar Shukla, DR

Section 144Section 250Section 250(6)

Doctor. There is no reason as to why this explanation of the assessee cannot be accepted. Though learned DR opposed the condonation of delay, in the interest of justice, I am inclined to condone the delay and to give an opportunity to the assessee to present his case on merits

Takdah Lingding Gpskus Ltd., Darjeeling vs. ITO, Ward-3(2), Darjeeling

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

ITA 211/KOL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 250Section 80P

location and it was very tough to move but ld. CIT(A) did not consider and dismissed the appeal. His prayer is to condone the delay and case record be sent back to the ld. CIT(A) for fresh decision. 3. We have perused the record and find that ... appeal filed is not in conformity with the provisions of Section 249(2) of the Act and there is no sufficient cause for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The present appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. 4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order the assessee

Vedansh Traders Pvt. Ltd., Howrah vs. ITO-Ward-13(1), Kol, Kolkata

Appeal is hereby dismissed on the point of limitation

ITA 632/KOL/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 143(3)Section 250

Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that the law of limitation being substantive, the power of discretion to condone the delay is to be exercised judiciously and cannot be exercised in a routine manner. The parties are expected to approach the Court in adherence ... limitation. Thus, filing an appeal is the rule and condoning the delay is the exception, wherein the Courts has to exercise its discretionary power judiciously and by recording reasons. Unexplained delay cannot be condoned. Such unexplained delay is to be construed as an uncondonable delay. Consequently, uncondonable delay cannot

Vipul Jain, Indore vs. The Income Tax Officer, 5(2), Indore

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

ITA 431/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivipul Jain Ito, 5(2) 18, Ganesh Colony, Rambag Indore Vs. Mp (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Agnpj8206E Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.04.2024

Delhi for A.Y.2017-18. 2. There is a delay of 129 days in filing the present appeal. The assesse has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by an affidavit. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the impugned order was passed ... knowledge of the assessee. Ld. AR has referred to the death certificate of grandfather of the assessee attached with the application for condonation of delay and submitted that due to demise of the grandfather of the assessee he could not come to the knowledge of the impugned order and only

Keeday Makauday Foundation, Jaipur vs. CIT(Exemption) Jaipur, Jaipur

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

ITA 894/JPR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur29 Apr 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Vivek Bhargav (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik ( CIT) a

Section 10Section 12ASection 253(5)Section 80G

days in filing of the present appeal by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed application for condonation of delay with following prayers and the assessee to this effect also filed an affidavit :- “1. The above-named assessee is filing an income tax appeal before ... Asstt. CIT [2019] 101 taxmann.com 191/260 Taxman 372 (SC) the affidavit filed by the assessee before The Hon'ble Bombay High Court, for condonation of delay in filing appeal, it was averted that as four appeals on identical issues for earlier years were pending before this Court, he was under

Sri Gayatri Credit Co-Op Society Limited, Tiptur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Tiptur

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

ITA 320/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Abhijit S. Bapu, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel

Section 115BSection 69A

outset, there is a delay of 122 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal by the assessee. In the application for condonation of delay and affidavit, it is stated that the principal officer looking after Page 2 of 4 the tax matters was not keeping good health and there ... time for filing of appeal and led to delay. Relying on the decision of Collector Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji and other judgments, condonation of delay is requested. 3. After hearing both the parties, it is observed that there are sufficient reasons for the delay and following the judgment

The Karnataka State Co-Operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1060/BANG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR

Section 2Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

1060/Bang/2023 2020-21 138 days 4.1 For the delay in filing the appeals before this Tribunal, the Ld.AR has filed applications for condonation of delay with the affidavits. The affidavit filed by the assessee for all the years are identical and therefore the affidavit for condonation of delay ... malafide intention on behalf of assessee in not filing the present appeals within time. In our opinion there is a sufficient cause for condoning the delay as observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., reported

The Karnataka State Co-Operative Agriculture and Rural Development Bank, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 1059/BANG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri K. Sheshadri, CA &For Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT – DR

Section 2Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

1060/Bang/2023 2020-21 138 days 4.1 For the delay in filing the appeals before this Tribunal, the Ld.AR has filed applications for condonation of delay with the affidavits. The affidavit filed by the assessee for all the years are identical and therefore the affidavit for condonation of delay ... malafide intention on behalf of assessee in not filing the present appeals within time. In our opinion there is a sufficient cause for condoning the delay as observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Collector Land Acquisition Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., reported