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.

145 results for “TDS”+ Condonation of Delayclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai996Pune711Mumbai650Patna614Delhi601Bangalore491Hyderabad368Kolkata293Nagpur262Raipur212Cochin209Jaipur200Chandigarh160Ahmedabad145Visakhapatnam116Cuttack103Lucknow73Surat63Karnataka54Indore52Rajkot35Amritsar34Dehradun25Jodhpur24Kerala23Allahabad19Guwahati18Panaji16Agra15Ranchi11Jabalpur10Varanasi9SC7Telangana2Rajasthan1Calcutta1

Key Topics

TDS60Addition to Income53Deduction38Section 143(3)34Disallowance34Section 1033Section 143(1)29Section 25028Section 14724Condonation of Delay

RADHE FINSEC INDIA LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 506/AHD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 234A

condone the delay of 2490 days in filing the above appeal arising out of the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) relating to the Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A No. 506/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Radhe Finsec India Ltd. vs. ITO 2. Brief facts

CAT COSMETICS AND HEALTHCARE PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Showing 1–20 of 145 · Page 1 of 8

...
24
Section 201(1)21
Section 80I21
ITA 1189/AHD/2024[2012-13]Status: Disposed
ITAT Ahmedabad
21 May 2025
AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 40

TDS. In view of the same, such disallowance is prayed to be deleted. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by disallowing the brought forward loss of Rs. 5,35,488/-. It is submitted that the appeal in the appellant company's case for AY 2011-12 has not yet been decided and is pending

SANDEEPKUMAR MITHULAL MEHTA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(3)(10), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1002/AHD/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 1002/Ahd/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Sandeepkumar Mithulal Mehta, I.T.O., 7, Rajasthan Society, Vs. Ward-3(3)(10), Opp. Meghdoot Petrol Pump, Ahmedabad. Sahibaug, Ahmedabad.

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Goyal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana Sr. DR
Section 5

condone the delay of 389 days in filing the appeal and proceed to hear the appeal on merit for the adjudication. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. Whether the ITO was legally correct in arbitrarily issuing the summons in contravention

BHIKHABHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1,, HIMATNAGAR

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

ITA 2597/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir VoraFor Respondent: Shri Rajkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 57

delay be condoned and the assessee be given a fair chance to argue his case on merits. ITA Nos.2596 & 2597/Ahd/2025 [Bhikhabhai Somabhai Pate vs. ITO] A.Y. 2018-19 - 3 – 5. We have gone through the orders of the authorities below. The orders reveal the assessee’s case to have been reopened for assessment, finding the assessee to have received interest

BHIKHABHAI SOMABHAI PATEL,SABARKANTHA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1, HIMATNAGAR

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

ITA 2596/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri S. N. Divatia & Shri Samir VoraFor Respondent: Shri Rajkumar M Vasavda, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 270ASection 57

delay be condoned and the assessee be given a fair chance to argue his case on merits. ITA Nos.2596 & 2597/Ahd/2025 [Bhikhabhai Somabhai Pate vs. ITO] A.Y. 2018-19 - 3 – 5. We have gone through the orders of the authorities below. The orders reveal the assessee’s case to have been reopened for assessment, finding the assessee to have received interest

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE DY.CIT, RANGE-4,, BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 225/AHD/2014[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

condone the delay in filing he appeal. 9. Now we proceed to decide both the appeals on merit. In ground no.1, the assessee is challenging validity of re-assessment orders passed under section 147 of the Act. The assessee has filed statement facts in ITA No.1864/Ahd/2013 and 225.Ahd/2014 the Asstt.year 2005-06, which is running into 35 pages

WELSPUN PROJECTS LTD.(FORMERLY KNOWN AS MSK PROJECTS (INDIA) LTD.),BARODA vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1864/AHD/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1864/Ahd/2013 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 & "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2006-2007 Welspun Projects (Formerly Known Ito, Ward-4(1) As Msk Projects (India) Ltd. Vs Baroda. 707-708, Sterling Centre R.C.Dutt Road, Alkapuri Baroda 390 005. Pan : Aabcm 4107 C अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Vartik Chokshi With Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, Dr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi with Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt.Aparna M. Agrawal, DR
Section 143(3)Section 148Section 80I

condone the delay in filing he appeal. 9. Now we proceed to decide both the appeals on merit. In ground no.1, the assessee is challenging validity of re-assessment orders passed under section 147 of the Act. The assessee has filed statement facts in ITA No.1864/Ahd/2013 and 225.Ahd/2014 the Asstt.year 2005-06, which is running into 35 pages

DEEP MULTIPLEX PVT. LTD.,BARODA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1) (1), BARODA

In the results, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1719/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Feb 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-आयकर अपील सं./ Ita.No.1719/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/ Asstt. Year: 2012-13 Deep Muliplex P.Ltd. Dcit, Cir.1(1)(4) 9, Arunoday Society Baroda. Vs 2, Mangaljyot Apartment Alkapuri Baroda Pan : Aabck 4719 Q अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri M.K. Patel, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 03/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 12/02/2020 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 8. In the appeal, the assessee has raised as many as five grounds, but sole issue involved in these grounds is that the ld.CIT(A) has erred in treating the income of the assessee under the head “income from other sources” instead of “business income”. 9. Brief facts

MANSHA TEXTILES PVT. LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-2(1)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 1396/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2012-13 Mansha Textiles P. Ltd. The Ito, Ward-2(1)(1) 1, Vikram Society Vadodara. Gotri Road, Vadodara Pan : Aadcm 0191 J (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, Ar Revenue By : Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 09/10/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/10/2025 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Ms.Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.P. Srivastava, Sr.DR
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 24

delay of about 1012 days. The assessee’s case on condonation was that serious internal disputes between existing and former directors were pending before the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the Company Law Board, that efforts at amicable resolution failed, and that only the present management later decided to pursue pending legal matters including the present appeal

STATE BANK OF INDIA (BHILAD BRANCH),,VALSAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals are allowed

ITA 3226/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jul 2017AY 2013-14

condone the delay and proceed to take up these appeals on merits. I.T.A. Nos.3226 to 3267/Ahd/2016 State Bank of India group case Page 9 of 14 7. Briefly stated, the relevant material facts are like this. There is admittedly delay in filing of TDS

STATE BANK OF INDIA (SARIGAM BRANCH),,VALSAD vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC GHAZIABAD,, GAZIABAD

In the result, all these appeals are allowed

ITA 3267/AHD/2016[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jul 2017AY 2015-16

condone the delay and proceed to take up these appeals on merits. I.T.A. Nos.3226 to 3267/Ahd/2016 State Bank of India group case Page 9 of 14 7. Briefly stated, the relevant material facts are like this. There is admittedly delay in filing of TDS

SALIM VALIMOHAMAND MEMAN,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-6(1)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2326/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Hon’Ble Vice- & Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Varis V. Isani, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 249(2)Section 253Section 3Section 5

TDS Circle Ahmedabad. 4, Sahajanad Society Vs Danilimda Ahmedabad. PAN : ACBPM 7325 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Varis V. Isani, AR Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/07/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee

BALARAM CONSTRUCTION LIMITED,BANASKANTHA vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed as non- maintainable

ITA 727/AHD/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalassessment Year : 2018-19 Balaram Construction Ltd. The Pcit 309, 3Rd Floor, Shital-9 Vs Ahmedabad-1 Opp. Bihari Bagh, Palanpur Ahmedabad – 380 015 Banaskantha – 385 001 (Gujarat) (Gujarat) Pan: Aaacb 6264 C

For Appellant: Shri P.F. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 263

condonation of delay it is to be ensured that a meritorious case is not thrown out on the grounds of limitation. 4.1. Taking note of this submission of the Ld.Counsel for the assessee, he was asked at bar to explain how on merits he had a good case before the Ld.PCIT such that if the appeal is held

VISHAL EXPORTS OVERSEAS LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-8,, AHMEDABAD

In the result, ground No.7 raised by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 399/AHD/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Jun 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Arjun Lal Saini & Ms. Madhumita Royassessment Year:2009-10 Vishal Exports Overseas Ltd., The Acit, Circle-8, 301 Sheel Complex, 4 Mayur Colony, Vs Ahmebada. Nr. Mithakhali Six Road, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan :Aaacv 2354 D (Applicant) (Responent) Assessee By : Ms Urvashi Shodhan, Advocate Revenue By : Shria. P. Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाईक"तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 21/04/2022 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement: 29/06/2022 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Ms Urvashi Shodhan, AdvocateFor Respondent: ShriA. P. Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234ASection 271(1)(c)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 7. Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee relates to disallowance of Rs.9,460/- under section 14A r.w.s. Rule 8D of the Rules. 8.Learned Counsel for the assessee, informs the Bench that assessee, does not wish to press ground No.1, therefore, we dismiss ground No.1, as not pressed. 9.Ground No.2 relates

AMISH UMESH JANI,THANE, MAHARASHTRA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(2)(5), AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

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

ITA 864/AHD/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Malay Kalavadia, A.RFor Respondent: Shri M. Anand Kumar, Sr. D.R
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 271

condoning the delay. So far as other additions of Rs. 3,95,595/-, the assessee has submitted that this is rental income received from Landmark Education Breakthrough Technologies Pvt. Ltd. on which TDS

STERLING ADDLIFE INDIA PRIVATE LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 229/AHD/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jul 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Hon’Ble Vice- & Shri Rajpal Yadav, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri A.C. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

TDS Circle Ahmedabad. Sterling Hospital Building Vs Off Gurukul Road, Memnagar Ahmedabad 380 052. अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri A.C. Shah, AR Revenue by : Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 15/07/2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date of Pronouncement: 26/07/2019 आदेश/O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessee

ISPATAM METALS,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WAD-5(3)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result all the grounds raised on merits of the addition made are dismissed

ITA 292/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri S.N. DivetiaFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-D.R
Section 250

delay in filing of present appeal of 69 days is condoned. 4. Taking up the appeal for adjudication the grounds raised read as under:- “1.1 The order passed by U/s. 250 passed on 09.09.2024 for AY 2018-19 by NFAC, [CIT(A)], Delhi (for short CIT(A)" upholding the additions aggregating to Rs. 4,78,45,243/- made

MORE MOVER SALES PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1)(4),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 978/AHD/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Feb 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavassessment Year : 2008-09 More Mover Sales Pvt Ltd, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O. Shri Pinakin Ramanlal Soni, Ward 2(1)(4), Director, Ahmedabad 13, Paras Kunj Society, Part-2, Nr. Umiya Vijay Bus Stop, Satellite, Ahmedabad [Pan : Aadcm 2936 P] अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Biren Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 04/02/2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 05/02/2020

For Appellant: Shri Biren Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Kumar, Sr DR
Section 148Section 154Section 249(3)

condoning the delay of 157 days in filing the appeal before the learned First Appellate Authority and thereby confirming an addition of Rs.6,98,050/- made by the Assessing Officer. 4. The brief facts of the case are that, according to the Assessing Officer, he received an information on the basis of data available in Form No.26AS in ITD system

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(3)(2)(FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3)), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 87/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

TDS credit of Rs. 42,830/- while calculating demand of Rs. 2,32,474/-. 6. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the learned AO in levying interest u/s. 234A/B/C/D of the Act. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case

NIRAJ PRATAPBHAI SHAH,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-3(3)(2), (FORMERLY ITO, WARD-3(3)(3),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 85/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench

For Appellant: Shri Kushal Fofaria, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Trupti Patel, Sr. D.R
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

TDS credit of Rs. 42,830/- while calculating demand of Rs. 2,32,474/-. 6. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the learned AO in levying interest u/s. 234A/B/C/D of the Act. 7. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case