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.

10 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 53(1)(i)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai590Mumbai454Delhi451Kolkata245Pune214Hyderabad213Bangalore203Ahmedabad190Karnataka142Jaipur139Chandigarh112Visakhapatnam84Nagpur66Indore55Cuttack54Surat53Amritsar52Lucknow39Calcutta39Raipur39Cochin37Rajkot33Patna21SC16Guwahati14Telangana11Agra10Allahabad9Varanasi9Jodhpur7Dehradun5Rajasthan5Jabalpur4Orissa3Ranchi2Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 12A(1)(ac)8Section 272A5Section 2715Section 80G(5)(iv)4Section 114Section 684Addition to Income4Exemption4Natural Justice

SMT. SARLA DEVI,ALIGARH vs. ITO WARD 1(1), ALIGARH

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 70/AGR/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Agra17 May 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain

Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 68Section 69Section 69C

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 3. The following grounds have been raised: “1. Because the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly and illegally confirmed the penalty imposed by the Assessing Officer u/s 271(l)(c) of the I. T. Act. 2. Because the assessee duly discharged her onus of proving the cash credits to be genuine. The addition

SHRI ACHLESHWAR MAHADEVJI JI SARVJANIK NIYAS,GWALIOR vs. CIT(E), BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

4
Section 271(1)(c)3
Section 102
Penalty2
ITA 417/AGR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Agra16 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year : 2025-26 Shri Achleshwar Mahadev Ji V Cit (Exemption) Sarvajanik Nyas, Sanatan Bhopal Dharm Mandir Road Gwalior- 474 001 Pan : Aahts1225J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

condoning the delay. 24. On the question of perversity of the decision of the Tribunal we may also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 28 (SC). In that judgment, it was noted that only a question of law can be referred for decision of the Court

SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXEMPTION), BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

ITA 579/AGR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Agra20 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)

condoning the delay. 24. On the question of perversity of the decision of the Tribunal we may also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 28 (SC). In that judgment, it was noted that only a question of law can be referred for decision of the Court

SIDDHI VINAYAK SHIKSHA PRASAR EVAM SAMAJ KALYAN SAMITI ,GWALIOR vs. CIT(EXTEMPTION) , BHOPAL

In the result, the both the appeals ITA No

ITA 578/AGR/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Agra20 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh

Section 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G(5)(iv)

condoning the delay. 24. On the question of perversity of the decision of the Tribunal we may also refer to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sree Meenakshi Mills Ltd. vs. CIT (1957) 31 ITR 28 (SC). In that judgment, it was noted that only a question of law can be referred for decision of the Court

M/SWAHEGURU BUSINESS (P) LTD.,SARV NAGAR vs. DCIT-CC, AGRA

The appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 46/AGR/2020[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Agra03 Feb 2021AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar,And Dr. Mitha Lal Meena

Section 272ASection 272A(1)(d)

1. BECAUSE, 'appellant' denies its liability for being subjected to penalty under section 272A(l)(d)of the 'Act’. 2. BECAUSE, on the fact of the circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) heard in refusing to condoned the delay of 30 days ignoring the detailed submissions filed by the assessee. 3. BECAUSE, the Ld. C1T(A) erred

M/S KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI,ETAWAH vs. DCIT-CPC, AGRA

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

ITA 92/AGR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra31 Jul 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & S.A. No. 04/Agra/2019) (Assessment Year-2015-16)

Section 10Section 11Section 11(2)Section 143(1)Section 282

53,96,247/- u/s 143(1) of the Act as a result of computerized processing of the appellant’s return of income. 3. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the order of computation of income of the assessee under appeal was delivered to it by post and can be accessed at assessee’s portal. As per provisions of section

STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A, GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

ITA 3/AGR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra31 May 2018AY 2013-14

1-3 ITO (TDS), AAACS 8577 K ITA.03,06 And State Bank of City Center, BPLS04808G 07 / Ag/ 2018 India, Main Gwalior A.Y.2013-14 Branch- Bada, Gwalior 4-5. 4&8/Agr/2018 State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K A.Y.2013-14 City Center, BPLM02526G India, Branch- Gwalior Industrial Estate Hazira, Gwalior 6. 05/ Agr/2018 ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K State Bank of AYs 2013-14 City

STATE BANK OF INDIA,GWALIOR vs. CIT A , GWALIOR

In the result, ITA No.42/Agr/2018 is allowed for statistical

ITA 6/AGR/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Agra31 May 2018AY 2013-14

1-3 ITO (TDS), AAACS 8577 K ITA.03,06 And State Bank of City Center, BPLS04808G 07 / Ag/ 2018 India, Main Gwalior A.Y.2013-14 Branch- Bada, Gwalior 4-5. 4&8/Agr/2018 State Bank of ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K A.Y.2013-14 City Center, BPLM02526G India, Branch- Gwalior Industrial Estate Hazira, Gwalior 6. 05/ Agr/2018 ITO (TDS), AAACS8577K State Bank of AYs 2013-14 City

KASTURI DEVI,ETAH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , ETAH

In the result, assessee’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 7/AGR/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Nov 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: : Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2020-21

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 68

delay caused in filing this appeal stands condoned. 3. Brief facts state that Smt. Kasturi Devi enjoys income from sale and purchase of potatoes and garlic(Lahsun), pension income, agricultural income and interest income. She filed her return of income for the assessment year 2020-21 on 31.12.2020, declaring total income at Rs.3,36,650/-. It was found that

SHAMIM QURESHI,JHANSI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JHANSI

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

ITA 587/AGR/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Agra02 Apr 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sunil Kumar Singhshamim Qureshi, Vs. Income Tax Officer, 651/1, Cic Campus, Jhansi Jhokhan Bagh, Jhansi,Up (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aajpq3427C Assessee By : Shri Sanjay Agarwal, Ca Revenue By: Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18/03/2026

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Shailendra Srivastava, Sr. DR
Section 147Section 54F

1. The appeal in ITA No. 587/AGR/2025 for AY 2015-16, arises out of the order of the ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘ld. CIT(A)’, in short] dated 23.09.2024 against the order of assessment passed u/s 147 r.w.s. 144B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) dated