“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

Smt Beena Rajen Shah, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-19(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1681/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Aug 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesmt.Beena Rajesh Shah, Vs. Ito – 19(1)(2), C/2, 454, 6Th Floor, Matru Mandir, Matru Ashish, Tardeo Road, Nepean Sea Road, Mumbai-400007. Mumbai-400006, Maharastra. Pan/Gir No. : Aagps8608G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Ms.Shreya Gosavi.Ar Respondent By : Ms. R.M. Brindha.Dr Date Of Hearing 21.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 22.08.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi/ Cit(A) Passed U/S 143(3) & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Ms.Shreya Gosavi.ARFor Respondent: Ms. R.M. Brindha.DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24

assessee submitted that there is a delay in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld.DR has no Smt Beena Rajan Shah, Mumbai. specific objections. Accordingly, condone the delay

M/S. Sunil & Company, Jodhpur vs. ACIT, Circle-1, Jodhpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 502/JODH/2018[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur03 Aug 2023AY 2004-05

Bench: Its Hearing Before Your Honour.”

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

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: Application for condonation of delay of 3 days in filing of appeal. The above appeal is preferred against the order ... filing the appeal. The said delay is not due to wilful default. It is prayed that the ITAT Bench may be pleased to condone the delay of 3 days in filing the appeal.” 4. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR did not objected to assessee’s application

The Phambra Multipurpose Co-Op Society Limited, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar vs. Income Tax Officer ( TDS), Jalandhar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 142/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 119Section 194A(3)(v)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 80

appeal of the assessee was filed with delay of 102 days. The assessee filed the petition for condonation of delay and an affidavit. The assessee LT.A. No. 142/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2014-15 [0% explained that the delay was caused due taking permission from Asst. Registrar Co-operative, Nawanshahr which

Shri Manjit Singh, Hoshiarpur vs. Income Tax Officer Ward, Dasuya

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 132/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

heard or disposed off.” 3. The appeal of the assessee was filed with delay of 17 days. The assessee filed the petition for condonation of delay. The assessee explained that the delay was due to non-communication from the counsel of assessee who left the job and had not informed

Awanish Pandey, Ambikapur, Surguja vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 128/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.128/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Meena, CIT-DR

Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 263

counsel so approached advised the assessee to file appeal before ITAT against the revision order passed u/s 263 along with a request for condonation of delay. Until this time, the assessee was not aware of procedure relating to appeal. Therefore, the delay is attributable mainly to the fact that ... account of a bonafide mistake which had occasioned on his part, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. We, thus, in all fairness condone the delay involved in filing of the present appeal before us. 7. At the very outset, it was averred by the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short

Santosh Pandey, Ambikapur, Surguja vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 127/RPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.127/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Meena, CIT-DR

Section 142(2)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 263

counsel so approached advised the assessee to file appeal before ITAT against the revision order passed u/s 263 along with a request for condonation of delay. Until this time, the assessee was not aware of procedure relating to appeal. Therefore, the delay is attributable mainly to the fact that ... assessee, but is apparently prompted by a bonafide mistake on her part, therefore, the same merits to be condoned. We, thus, condone the delay involved in filing of the present appeal before us. 7. Adverting to the merits of the case, it transpires that the case of the assessee

Vasundhara Vrix Vanwadi Jal Sinchn Vikas Sahakai Mandli Ltd., Na vs. Arivs.the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Navsari Circle, Navsari

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

ITA 280/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat03 Aug 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Physical Hearing) Vasundhara Vrix Vanwadi A.C.I.T., Jalsinchnvikas Sahakari Mandli Ltd., Navsari Circle, Navsari, Vs. Room No. 302, 3Rd Floor, “Vrindavan Campus” At:Lachhakadi, Post-Gangpur, Tal. Vansada, Dist.- Income Tax Office, Navsari, Gujarat-396050. Charpool, Awabaug, Pan No. Aaajv 0058 M Navsari, Gujarat-396445. Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 250(6)Section 254(1)Section 274Section 80P(2)(a)

assessee submits that there is a delay of about 315 days in filing appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay alongwith affidavit of Shri Ratanbhai Navsubhai Thorat, Secretary of assessee society. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that the delay in filing appeal ... file appeal against such order. The assessee has filed appeal after one year of passing of order without showing sufficient cause for condonation of delay. 5. In the rejoinder submission, the ld. AR of the assessee submits that the assessee was not aware about the status of notice

Mother Teresa Parmarth Shikshan Sansthan, Sikar vs. CIT(Exemption), Jaipur

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 352/JPR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 12ASection 5

delay of 61 days in filing both the appeals by the assessee for which the ld. AR of the assessee filed applications for condonation of delay with following prayers:- “1. In this connection it is submitted that the applicant is Trust/Society. The assessee has filed application before CIT(Exemption), Jaipur ... Land & Acquisition v. Mst. Kotiji & 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

Mother Teresa Parmarth Shikshan Sansthan, Sikar vs. CIT(E), Jaipur`

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 351/JPR/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur03 Aug 2023AY 2023-24

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Shrawan Gupta (Adv.)For Respondent: Shri Arvind Kumar (CIT)

Section 12ASection 5

Abhay Chordia, Jaipur vs. DCIT Circle 1, Jaipur

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 291/JPR/2023[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Jaipur03 Aug 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Deeraj Borad, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Anoop Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69C

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: “Ref.: Communication of the defect in ITA 291/JPR/2023 (Defect notice dated 2023-May-16) With reference to above it is respectfully submitted ... bench for your this act of kindness.” 4. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR not objected to assessee’s application for condonation of delay and prayed that Court may decide the issue as deem fit in the interest of justice as delay is of ten days only

Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation, Mumbai vs. DCIT (Exemption)-2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1801/MUM/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Prateek JainFor Respondent: Smt. Mahita Nair

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 249(2)Section 250

no.1801/Mum./2023 2. On the facts and circumstances of the appellant's case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal, without affording any opportunity, for reasons mentioned in the impugned order or otherwise. 3. On the facts and circumstances ... 22/12/2020. We find from the record that the assessee also filed an application dated 21/12/2020 before the learned CIT(A) seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal, wherein the assessee submitted that the delay is caused due to the Covid-19 pandemic as its establishment, which is a public

Rotary Seva Trust, Mumbai vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 1060/MUM/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos.1059 & 1060/Mum/2023 (A.Y. 2022-23) Rotary Seva Trust Kalyan Vs. Cit Exemption 604/B Vrindavan Room No. 322, 3 Rd Floor, Paradise, Near Mumbai Income Tax Office, Pmt University Kalyan Sub Building, Shankar Seth Centre, Kalyan – West Road, Pune Maharashtra – 421301 Maharashtra – 411037 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaetr4794G Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Mahesh K. MadkholkarFor Respondent: Neena Jeph

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

days in filing the appeal by the assessee trust. During the course of appellate proceedings before us, the assessee has filed application for condonation of delay dated 29.03.2023 on the ground that assesse was not well versed with statutory compliance and was not having competent staff to look after technical ... bonafide cause for delay in filing the appeal as this trust was recently created vide registration no. E- 12439/Thane dated 20.10.2021. Therefore, we condone the delay in filing these appeal. 4. The assessee has filed application in Form 10AB u/s 12A(i)(ac) (iii) and under clause (iii) of first

Rotary Seva Trust, Kalyan vs. CIT, Exemption, Pune

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

ITA 1059/MUM/2023[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2022-23

For Appellant: Mahesh K. MadkholkarFor Respondent: Neena Jeph

Section 12ASection 80GSection 80G(5)

Shafa Home, New Delhi vs. ITO, (Exemption) Ward 2(1), New Delhi

Appeal stands allowed for statistical

ITA 725/DEL/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 13(9)Section 143(3)

F.NO.197/55/2018-ITA-I Government of India, Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Direct Taxes ***** New Delhi, the 19 February, 2020 Sub: Condonation of delay under section 119(2)(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in filing of Return of Income ... Form No.9A and Form No. 10.- Reg. Representations have been received seeking condonation of delay in filing Return of Income by the Charitable institutions for the Assessment Year 2016- 17 onwards on the grounds of hardship. The Board has issued Circulars authorizing the Commissioners of Income Tax to admit belated

Mamta Rani, Saharanpur vs. ITO Ward-3(3)(2), Saharanpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 433/DEL/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 144Section 250Section 69A

Appellant has’nt got any real opportunity of being heard before any of the Assessment/Appellate authorities. 2. The assessee has filed application for condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. Considering the averments made in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned

Muqeem Ahmad, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward-1(4), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1728/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

facts reveals that the notice of demand was served on 25.11.2016 as per ITNS. Thus there is unjustifiable delay in filing the appeal. Condonation of delay is not a matter of right since appellant has failed to show reasons of delay on last day of limitation and thereafter for each ... facts and in surrounding circumstances in failing to consider the written explanation dated 15-05-2019 and the issue of condonation of delay with empathically pragmatically, resulting in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. 5. That

Muqeem Ahmad, Ghaziabad vs. ITO Ward-1(4), Ghaziabad

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

ITA 1727/DEL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

All India Presiding Officers Conference, New Delhi vs. CIT(Exemption), New Delhi

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1498/DEL/2023[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2023

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Anubhav Sharma

Section 10

Heard and perused the record. 3. On hearing learned AR it comes up that an application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing of the appeal. The same has facts which also touch the merits of case. 4. Learned AR submitted that the assessee is primarily functionality

Uma Maheswara Reddy Majji, Visakhapatnam vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(1), Visakhapatnam

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

ITA 163/VIZ/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.163/Viz/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year :2014-15) Uma Maheswarareddy Majji, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 52-11-11/1, Resapuvanipalem, Ward-3(1), Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam. Andhra Pradesh – 530018. Pan: Alxpm 1484 E (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Sri Ss Sarat Chandra, Ar ""याथ" क" ओर से / Respondent By : Sri On Hari Prasada Rao, Sr. Ar सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 03/07/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of : 31/07/2023 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri SS Sarat Chandra, ARFor Respondent: Sri ON Hari Prasada Rao

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250

Affidavit filed by the assessee wherein the reasons for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit were explained and sought for condonation of delay. For immediate reference, the contentions of the Affidavit for condonation of delay are extracted herein below: “1. Whereas on 09/05/2023 assessee was affected with ... assessee in filing the appeal before the Tribunal within the prescribed time limit. Therefore, in my view, it is a fit case to condone the delay and hence I hereby condone the delay of 9 days in filing the appeal 3 before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal

M/S Athazhakunnu Mappila L.P. School, Kannur vs. ITO Ward TDS, Kannur

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

ITA 912/COCH/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin31 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrisanjay Arora & Shriabyt.Varkey

For Appellant: Shri Arun Raj S., AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. J.M. Jamuna Devi, Sr. D.R

Section 200A(1)Section 234E

merits, and on which aspect no contentions were raised before us by Shri Raj. That is, much less making out a case for condonation of delay in filing appeals before the first appellate authority, Shri Raj did not even bring this fact to our notice, which is deplorable, as indeed ... office of the ld.CIT(A). Where so, there was thus no occasion for it to plead it’s case, either with regard to condonation of delay or on merits. At column 15 of the Memo of Appeal before the first appellate authority (Form 35),it states some reasons, which therefore