BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtPhrasesAI ResearchHistory

Filters

BharatTax.net

Free search engine for ITAT (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) judgments across all 28 benches in India.

Quick Links

  • Search Judgments
  • Browse by Bench
  • Recent Judgments

About

BharatTax provides free access to Income Tax Appellate Tribunal orders for legal research and reference.

© 2026 BharatTax.net. All rights reserved.

3 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 254(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai192Surat139Delhi91Chennai64Ahmedabad64Jaipur60Kolkata44Rajkot34Raipur32Pune29Indore25Bangalore25Hyderabad21Visakhapatnam21Lucknow20Chandigarh18Cochin12Nagpur11Guwahati9Cuttack8Allahabad5SC5Varanasi5Agra3Patna3Panaji2Dehradun2Amritsar2Jabalpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)4Addition to Income3Section 50C(2)2

SANJANA GUPTA,JHANSI vs. ITO-WARD-2(3)(1) JHANSI, JHANSI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 433/AGR/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Agra21 Jan 2026AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri M. Balaganeshsanjana Gupta, Vs. Ito, 130, Gudri Bazar, Jhansi Ward-2(3)(1), Jhansi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Awbpg1536E Assessee By : Smt Prathna Jalan, Ca Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/01/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 21/01/2026 O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt Prathna Jalan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 254Section 50C(2)

condone the delay and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 3. Though the assessee has raised several grounds before me, the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld JCIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition made on account of differential Sanjana Gupta consideration under the head “Capital Gains

JAY JAY RAM YADAV,VILL. SUHAYA BLO.BAMORI, GUNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GUNA

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7/AGR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Agra04 Feb 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Assessment Year: 2012-13 Vs. Income Tax Officer, Sh. Jay Jay Ram Yadav, Vill. Suhaya Blo.Bamori, Guna Guna Pan :Aghpy4333R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Harish Sagani, Adv. Department By Sh. Shailendra Shrivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 05.02.2025 Order

Section 143(3)Section 254(1)

section 254(1) of the Act. 5. We keep in mind all these peculiar facts and circumstances and conclude in the larger interest of justice that a lump sum addition of Rs.50,000/- would be just and proper with a rider that the same shall not treated as a precedent. We make it clear before

RAGHVENDRA SINGH,GWALIOR vs. ITO 1(1), GWALIOR

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 409/AGR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Virtual Hearing) Raghvendra Singh, Vs. Ito, Lohgarh, Bhitarwar Ward-1(1), Road, Dabra, Gwalior, Gwalior Mp (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Berpr1313H Assessee By : None Revenue By: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Anil Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 69A

condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal of the Assessee for adjudication. 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the Learned CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs 5,63,204/- on account of alleged unexplained cash deposits in the bank account during April