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.

18 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 164(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai141Karnataka101Delhi87Chennai87Chandigarh64Bangalore49Cochin31Jaipur30Pune25Kolkata23Visakhapatnam19Ahmedabad18Hyderabad18Lucknow17Patna10Surat8Raipur8Indore7Telangana6Panaji5Nagpur4Jodhpur4Rajkot3Agra2Allahabad2Calcutta2SC2Cuttack2Jabalpur2Orissa1Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 1124Section 143(1)18Section 12A17Section 26314Section 80G(5)13Exemption12Section 1011Addition to Income9Section 148

MSK PROJECT (INDIA) JV LTD. CO.(MERGED WITH MADHAV INFRA PROJECT LTD),VADODARA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, VADODARA

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 498/AHD/2019[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Jan 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Mrs. Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarिनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2005-06 Msk Project (India) Jv Ltd. Vs. (Merged With Madhav Infra Acit, Projects Ltd), Circle-4, 4, Madhav House, Near Baroda Panchratna Building, Subhanpura, Vadodara Pan : Aadcm 1157 C अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) अपीलाथ" अपीलाथ" "" "" यथ" "" "" यथ" यथ"/ (Respondent) यथ" Assessee By : Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate & Shri Parin Shah, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.01.2024 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31.01.2024 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Annapurna Gupta: Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Iii, Baroda [Hereinafter Referred To As "Cit(A)" For Short] Dated 09.08.2012 Passed Under Section 250(6) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As "The Act" For Short], For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2005-06. 2. The Grounds Raised By The Assessee Are As Under:- “1. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts To Hold That No Appeal Lies Against Order Giving Effect To Findings Of Cit In Order Passed U/S 263 Of The Act. 2. Ld. Cit (A) Erred In Law & On Facts Dismissing Appeal Challenging Addition Of Rs.9,90,00,052/- Whereas Supreme Court Awarding Rs. 26.34 Lakhs

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Ms. Saumya Pandey Jain, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 234B
8
Limitation/Time-bar8
Section 1477
Condonation of Delay5
Section 250(6)
Section 263

delay Condonation in filing appeal (1) The appellant MSK Project (India) JV Limited now merged with Madhav Infra Projects Ltd filed return of income for A Y 2005/06 declaring loss of Rs. 48, 82, 805/- that was accepted & assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act. (2) Subsequently in order u/s 263 passed on 25.02.2010 ld. CIT holding order

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,AHMEDABAD, VADODARA. vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1 EXEMPTIONS, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1187/AHD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1187/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2019-10 Gujarat Technological University, The Dcit, Nr. Vishwakarma Govt. Engg. College, बनाम/ Circle-1, V/S. Near Visar Three Roads, Exemptions, Chandkheda Society Area S.O, Ahmedabad Gandhinagar, Ahmedabad-382424. (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg1109L अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 14/08/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 19/08/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: ] ] This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Cit(A)”] Dated 14.03.2025, For The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2019–20, Arising Out Of The Rectification Order Passed By The Centralized Processing Centre (Cpc), Bengaluru, Under

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, Sr-DR
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154

164 taxmann.com 757 (Ahd.-Trib.) have also taken the same view, holding that such procedural defects are curable and delay is condonable. 18. In view of the above, we hold that the delay in furnishing Form No. 10 and Form No. 10B in the present case deserves to be condoned in the interest of substantial justice. The orders

DCIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD vs. KOTA BARAN TOLLWAY PVT. LTD, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 2025/AHD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri Jaimin Shah, A.R
Section 80I

section. 2. It is humbly prayed to set aside the order of the Ld CIT(A) and direct the AO to re-examine the issue. 3. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new ground, which may be necessary.” Application for Condonation of Delay: 3. At the outset, we observe that the appeal

KOSHAMBH CHARITABLE TRUST,VADODARA vs. CPC, BANGALORE PRESENT JURISDICTION THE ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, VADODARA

In the result, the above ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 444/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Veerbadram Vislavath, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 143Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

condonation of delay in filing Form 10B for up to 365 days. Since the form was filed within that permissible window, the appellant contended that the exemption under Section 11 should not have been denied. Koshambh Charitable Trust vs. ITO(E) Asst.Year –2018-19 - 4– 6. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee submitted that assessee trust is eligible

TEJAS C. JOSHI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(3), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 712/AHD/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member), Shri Narendra Prasad Sinha (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 64

delay of six days in filing the appeal is hereby condoned. 3. Brief fact is that the assessee is an individual having income from house property, business income and other sources. For the Asst. Year 2011-12, assessee filed its original Return of Income on 07-07-2012 declaring total income of Rs.17,54,560/-. As per information available with

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,,AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, EXEMPTION, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT

In the result, the above ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 935/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad22 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Nandakumar, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 147Section 148Section 263

2– 5. The learned CIT(E) erred in fact and in law in initiating proceeding u/s 263 of the Act despite the fact that assessment order u/s 147 rws 144 rws 144B of the Act has been passed by the learned AO in accordance with the decision of jurisdictional High Court. 6. The learned CIT(E) erred in fact

KELAVANI MANDAL VALVOD TRUSTEE,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 357/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad02 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 357/Ahd/2021 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year:2017-2018 Kelvani Mandal Valvod Trustee, D.C.I.T., C/O Sarvajanik High School, Vs. Cpc , Valvod, Borsad, Banglore. Anand-388530. Pan: Aaatk2450L

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ravindra, Sr. D.R
Section 10Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

condone the delay happened in filing the appeal by the assessee and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. A.Y. 2017-18 3 4. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: The commissioner of appeals erred in not granting deduction of expenses of Rs.2,19,094/- from gross income. 4.1 The assessee has raised the following Additional ground

BHETASI KELVANI MANDAL,BHETASI vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 361/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

2-10-2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings

VASNA EDUCATION TRUST, VASNA,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 364/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

2-10-2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings

BHETASI KELVANI MANDAL,BHETASI vs. THE DCIT CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 360/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

2-10-2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings

SHREE GOPAL ASHRAM,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 362/AHD/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

2-10-2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings

SHREE GOPAL ASHRAM,BORSAD vs. THE DCIT, CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 363/AHD/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri B.T. Thakkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Abhimanyu Singh Yadav, Sr.D.R
Section 10Section 12ASection 138Section 143(1)

2-10-2021 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos (b) and (c) of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and any other laws, which prescribe period(s) of limitation for instituting proceedings

KAMINIBEN JAGDISHBHAI PATEL,ANAND vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, ANAND, ANAND

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2/AHD/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Mar 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice- & Ms Suchitra Kamblekaminiben Jagdishbhai Patel, The Income Tax Officer, Vs. 8, Akshar Bhuvan , Ward-1, Royal Park Opp. Aksharfarm, Anand. Pramukh Swami Marg, Anand-388001. [Pan :Awupp6590 L] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Ak Khandelwal, Ar Respondent By: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 25.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.03.2026

For Appellant: Shri AK Khandelwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Veerabadram Vislavath, Sr. DR
Section 144

2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in dismissing the appeal appeal in-limine without deciding the appeal on merits even though various documents filed on record 3. That the Id CIT(A) erred in rejecting the request of the appellant for condonation of the delay in filing of the appeal despite the fact that the appellant

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,AHMEDABAD , GUJARAT vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE - 1 EXEMPTIONS, AHMEDABAD, GUJARAT, AHMEDABAD , GUJARAT

The appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1337/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1337/Ahd/2025 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2018-19 Gujarat Technological Deputy Commissioner Of बनाम/ University Income Tax Circle-1 V/S. Nr.Vishwakarma Exemptions, Govt.Engg.College Ahmedabad – 380 015 Nr.Visar Three Roads Chandkheda Society Area So Ahmedabad – 382 424 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan: Aaalg 1109 L (अपीलाथ'/ Appellant) (!( यथ'/ Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Amrin Pathan, Ar Revenue By : Shri Rignesh Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04/09/2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 18/09/2025 आदेश/O R D E R Per Sanjay Garg:

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12A

164 taxmann.com 757 (Ahd.-Trib.) have also taken the same view, holding that such procedural defects are curable and delay is condonable. 18 In view of the above, we hold that the delay in furnishing Form No. 10 and Form No. 10B in the present case deserves to be condoned in the interest of substantial justice. The orders

BALDEVBHAI LALABHAI LUHAR,AHMEDABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(2), PRATYAKSHAR BHAVAN,AHMEDABAD

In the result, the ground no

ITA 888/AHD/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad11 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar

For Appellant: Respondent by: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri Sudhakar Verma, Sr. DR
Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

2– no such penalty is leviable. The proceedings are wrongly initiated. He may be directed to withdraw such proceedings. 4. The appellant craves to Add/alter any Ground of Appeal during the ITAT Proceedings. Application for condonation of Delay: 3. At the outset, at the time of hearing, it is noticed that there was a delay of 95 days in filing

GAYATRI CREATIVES,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(2) NOW CIRCLE 2(1)(1), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 565/AHD/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2010-11

Section 139Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

2) of the Act alongwith order disposing of the objections raised by the Assessment Year: 2010-11 Page 3 of 5 assessee was sent on 27.10.2017. The Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.22,41,216/- in respect of understated work-in-progress. 4. Being aggrieved by the Assessment Order under Section 147 read with Section

FLAVAROMA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION,AHMEDABAD vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1071/AHD/2024[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Feb 2025

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

Section 12ASection 3Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(v)

Section 80G(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). I.T.A No. 1071/Ahd/2024 Page No 2 Flavaroma Charitable Foundation vs. CIT(E) 2. The registration was denied by Ld. CIT(E) on account of delay in filing the final registration application u/s 80G(5)(v) of the Act. List of Dates and Events in this

SHREE RADHA MADHAV GAU SEVA CHARITABLE TURST,BHAVNAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION WARD), BHAVNAGAR

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

ITA 606/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year: 2017-18

Section 115BSection 131Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 164Section 69A

2 of 4 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC has erred in confirming the action of Assessing Officer in invoking provisions of Section 115BBE of the Act and in thereby taxiing entire unexplained money at 60% and levying surcharge at 25% which