“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

M/S General Fruit Traders, Jammu vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-1 (1), Jammu

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

ITA 7/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 May 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 144Section 250oSection 28

illness of his wife. The medical report was duly annexed and petition an affidavit. The ld. DR had not made any objection for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the delay of 79 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following ground: “1. That the order under appeal is against

Smt. Prabha Khandelwal L/H of Late Omprakash Khandelwal, Bhilai, Durg vs. Income Tax Officer-2(1), Bhilai, Durg

ITA 55/RPR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur26 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 55/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Late Omprakash Khandelwal (Through Legal Heir:Smt.Prabha Khandelwal) B-107, Surya Residency, Opposite M.J. College Kohka Road, Bhilai(C.G.)-490023 Pan: Anspk3247N .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri S.R.Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147

representative, therefore, the same in all fairness be condoned. 4 3. The Ld. DR did not raise any objection to the seeking of condonation of delay by the assessee appellant. After hearing the parties, I am of the considered view that as the delay involved in filing of the present

M/S Chouhan Education Socity, Bhopal vs. CIT, Bhopal

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 192/IND/2009[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 May 2023AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Chouhan Education Commissioner Of Society, Income-Tax, E-8,Trilanga, Bhopal Vs. Shahpura, Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaatc255Iq Assessee By Ms.Nisha Lahoti & Vijay Bansal, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 26.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.06.2023

Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 12A

I.T.A.No. 192/Ind/2009 A.Y.1999-2000 2. There is a delay of 55 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay, which is supported by the affidavit of Chairman of the assessee Society. 3. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representative as well ... condonation of delay. 4. The ld. Authorized Representative has submitted that initially the assessee challenged the order of Pr.CIT rejecting the approval u/s 10(23C) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, before the Hon'ble High Court in petition No.7692/2008 and thereafter the proceedings for registration u/s 12AA were also

Mohak Real Estate Private Limited, Gurugram, Haryana vs. PCIT-4, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1068/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumit Kumar Verma, Sr. DR

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

seeking details/information as desired to his satisfaction.” 3. The appeal was filed late by 114 days. Vide application dated 07.07.2021 the assessee sought condonation of delay in view of Hon’ble Supreme Court’s order dated 27.04.2021 in Miscellaneous Application No. 665/2021 in SMW(C) No.3/2020, a copy of which

Smt. Meha Jain, Jalgaon vs. DCIT (Central), Bhopal

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 996/IND/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 May 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanismt. Meha Jain Dcit(Central) 40, Jay Nagar, Jilha Peth Bhopal Vs. Jalgaon Maharashtra (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aeipj 3170 N Assessee By Shri P.D. Nagar, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 24.05.2023

Section 127Section 132(1)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 153A

Year 2008-09. 2. There is a delay of 30 days in filing the present appeal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by the affidavit of the assessee. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that in the case of the assessee

Shri Majid Ajit Shaikh, Silvassa vs. Income Tax Officer, Silvassa Ward, Silvassa

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 11/SRT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member)

Section 113Section 115BSection 144Section 254(1)Section 69A

filed on 03.01.2023, thus, there is delay of forty-two days in filing appeal before Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay which is supported by affidavit of assessee. The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee submits that delay in filing appeal was neither intentional ... prejudice, if delay in filing appeal is not condoned. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that there is a sufficient ground for condoning the delay as the assessee has shown his bona fide reason in depositing appeal fees in the month of December, 2022 itself. 3. On the other

Aspiring to Nuture the Smile of Humanity Ansh, Jaipur vs. CIT Exemption, Jaipur

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

ITA 448/JPR/2022[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 May 2023AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Shri Dheeraj Borad (C.A.)For Respondent: Ms Runi Pal ( Addl. CIT)

Section 12A

days may kindly be condoned. 3. During the course of hearing, the ld. DR fairly 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. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused ... materials available on record. The Bench Noted that the assessee for condonation of delay of 02 days has merit and we concur with the submission of the assessee. Thus the delay of 02 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision

Awami Khidmat Social Welfare Trust, Bulandshahr vs. CIT(Exemption), Lucknow

In the result the appeal is dismissed in limine

ITA 5569/DEL/2017[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri K. Praveen Sidharth

Section 12A

noticed that the appeal is filed with a delay of 52 days and the assessee has not filed any petition for condonation of delay. In the absence of petition for condonation of delay, the appeal is not maintainable. 4. In the result the appeal is dismissed in limine. Order pronounced

Samyukta Health & Academic Society, Anakapalle vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption Ward, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 45/VIZ/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam23 May 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.45/Viz/2023 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2020-21) Samyukta Health & Academic Vs. Income Tax Officer Society Exemption Ward Ramalayam Street, Gandhi Nagar Visakhapatnam Anakapalle [Pan : Aagts9608E] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 24.04.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23.05.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi In Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/10482/12219(1), Arising Out Of The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer (Ao) U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “Act”) For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2020-21. 2

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 234C

appeal of the assessee as the condonation petition filed by the assessee was pending before the Ld.Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions), Hyderabad for condoning the delay in filing Form No.10B belatedly, which was an essential prerequisite for allowing exemption u/s 11. 4. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal ... sciatica pain and was under treatment and bed rest during the period from 02.01.2021 to 05.02.2021. The assessee pleaded the Ld.CIT(E) to condone the delay as it was neither intentional nor deliberate. The Ld.AR, therefore, pleaded the Tribunal to set aside the order passed by the Ld.CIT

Kalyan Sahai Gurjar, Jaipur vs. CIT(A), Jaipur

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

ITA 195/JPR/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur23 May 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 195/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2011-12 Kalyan Sahai Gurjar S/o Surja Ram Gurjar Bhojera, Virat Nagar, Jaipur cuke Vs. CIT(A) Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ALMPG 1989 M vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Mahendra Prajapat (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra Prajapat (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT) a

Section 147

filed delayed by 2 days. The ld. AR of 2 Kalyan Sahai Gurjar vs. CIT the assessee relied upon the petition for condonation of delay as reproduced here in below: “Subject-Regarding defective in Appeal to ITAT, Jaipur Benches. Respected Sir, I would like to bring your kind notice that ... dated 30-03- 2022. Delay in delivering the physical document was on the part of service Provider. So please admit the Appeal and condone the delay in filling of appeal. B. Technical Issue at Portal – I faced technical glitch while filling the appeal. While filling the appeal one time password

Shree Swamy Samarth Prassana Oshiwara (E) Units Chs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer 25(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 237/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Shree Swamy Samarth, Ito-25(1)(3), Prassana Oshiwara (E) Unit C-10, Room No. 404, 4Th 3 Chs Ltd. Vs. Floor, Pratyakshakar Oshiwara (E) Unit 3 Chs Bhavan, Bkc, Ltd., Plot No. 1/41, Deep Mumbai-400051. Tower, New Link Road, Near Millat Nagar, Andheri (West) Mumbai-400053. Pan No. Aacas 7886 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Tarun Ghia Revenue By : Mr. A.N. Bhalekar, Cit-Dr : Date Of Hearing 10/05/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 22/05/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Tarun GhiaFor Respondent: Mr. A.N. Bhalekar, CIT-DR

Section 144Section 148

assessee and should have condoned the happening to the assessee and should have condoned the happening to the assessee and should have condoned the delay so that the assessme delay so that the assessment can take place on merits. nt can take place on merits. Shree Swamy Samarth Prassana Oshiwara ... find that the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the At the outset, we find that the Ld. CIT(A) has not condoned the delay of 387 days in filing the appeal before him and appeal has delay of 387 days in filing the appeal before him and appeal

M/S North Bihar Distributor, Purnea vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Purnea

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 68/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Jha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 44A

well as the assessee to avoid such duplicity. 3. Appeal of assessee is time barred by 238 days for which petition for condonation of delay is on record. From the petition filed by the assessee, we note that certain medical exigencies arose with the spouse ... served on 05.09.2019, which adequately demonstrates the intentions of the assessee to file the appeal within the prescribed limitation. Considering these facts, we condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee

M/S North Bihar Distributor, Purnea vs. ITO, Ward-3(1), Purnea

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 48/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Jha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 44A

Motor Magic Auto Zone, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward 2(2)(2), Ghaziabad

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2638/DEL/2022[2014-15 (Q-3)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: None

Section 200ASection 234E

absence of appellant after hearing the arguments of learned Senior DR and ex-parte qua assessee. Hence we proceed to adjudicate the appeals. Condonation of delay of 29 days 3. The assessee has filed an application in both the appeals seeking condonation of delay of 31 days ... that delay may kindly be condoned keeping in view reasonable cause shown by the assessee. The learned Senior DR strongly opposed to the condonation of delay. 4. On careful consideration of above we find that the delay of 29/31 days has been caused due to lapses and omissions

Motor Magic Auto Zone, Ghaziabad vs. ITO, Ward 2(2)(2), Ghaziabad

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 2637/DEL/2022[2013-14 (Q-2)]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri M. Balaganesh

For Appellant: None

Section 200ASection 234E

Dinesh Kumar, Palwal vs. ITO Ward - 1(2), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed on merits

ITA 1910/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 69A

days in filing appeal before the tribunal. I have heard arguments of both the sides on the prayer of appellant seeking condonation of delay of 237 days in filing appeal before the tribunal as per learned counsel of assessee, the copy of order of ld. CIT(A) dated

Ram Kishan, Palwal vs. ITO Ward - 2(2), Faridabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1909/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2023AY 2011-12

For Appellant: Shri Gurjeet Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR

Section 69A

Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sangh, Dhamtari vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 16/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Soodआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 15 & 16/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2016-17 & 2017-18 Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sangh C/O. Santosh Parekh, Near Hanuman Mandir, Near Itwari Bazar, Dhamtari, Chhatisgarh-493 773 Pan : Aahas5883K .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward-1, Raipur (C.G.). ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: S/Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

under: “CIRCULAR NO.10[F.NO.197/55/2018-ITA-I] SECTION 12A, READ WITH SECTION 119 OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961- CHARITABLE OR RELIGIOUS TURST-REGISTRATION OF- CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF FORM NO.10B FOR YEARS PRIOR TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2018-19 CIRCULAR NO.10[F.NO.197/55/2018-ITA-I], DATED 22-5-2019 SUPERSEDED BY CIRCULAR ... Circular/ Instruction issued in this regard, and with a view to expedite the disposal of applications filed by such trusts or institutions for condoning the delay in filing Form No. 10B and in exercise of the powers conferred under section 119(2) of the Act, the Central Board of Direct

Shri Jain Shwetamber Murtipujak Sangh, Dhamtari vs. Income Tax Officer, Exemption, Ward-1, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 15/RPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur22 May 2023AY 2016-17

For Appellant: S/Shri Sunil Kumar Agrawal &For Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

Shri Sudin Mahadev Sangodkar, Goa vs. Income Tax Officer, Daman Ward, Daman

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

ITA 207/SRT/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Surat22 May 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh(Virtual Hearing) Shri Sudin Mahadev Sangodkar, I.T.O., House No. 46B, 1/5 Next To Fab Ward-Daman Vs. India, Alta Mapusa, Bardez, Daman. North Goa, Goa-403507. Ph.9423530599 Email: Smsangodcar@Gmail.Com Pan No. Ajjps 0830 L Appellant/ Assessee Respondent/ Revenue

Section 156Section 254(1)Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

more opportunity to explain such delay. 5. The ld. AR submits that before this Tribunal, the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay in filing appeal before ld. CIT(A) and other evidence to show that the assessee was not served with the notice under section ... into deep, the matter may be restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) with liberty to assessee to file formal application for condonation of delay in filing appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld AR for the assessee submits that he under takes on behalf of the assessee