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.

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 207clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai204Karnataka101Delhi58Bangalore57Mumbai44Raipur41Kolkata36Chandigarh26Jaipur22Hyderabad16Cuttack12Surat9Pune6Visakhapatnam5Jabalpur5Rajkot5Ahmedabad4Lucknow4Guwahati3SC3Nagpur3Amritsar2Patna2Ranchi2Panaji1Rajasthan1Agra1Jodhpur1Cochin1Dehradun1Telangana1Varanasi1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)5Section 105Section 69A4Section 115B3Addition to Income3Section 143(3)2Section 1442Section 902Section 139(1)

MAHEMUDKHAN AJAMUDDIN RANA,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(3)(1), VADODARA

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

ITA 1198/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Hargovind Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 2(14)Section 69A

207 days in filing the appeal. The delay is hereby condoned. 7. On going through the submissions of the Counsel for the assessee and the Ld. DR, we note that the present appeal is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), whereby the assessee’s appeal was dismissed on account of non-appearance. The assessment

2
Unexplained Money2
Penalty2

THAKKAR MUKESHBHAI KESHAVLAL, HUF,AHMEDABAD vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICE, WARD-3(3)(5), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 1498/AHD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal & Shri Makarand V.Mahadeokarasstt.Year : 2017-18 Thakkar Mukeshbhai Keshavlal Huf Ito, Ward-3(3)(5) 456, 45Th Floor, Titanium City Centre Vs. Vejalpur, Ahmedabad. Nr.Sachin Tower Satellite Ahmedabad 380 015. Pan : Aaaht 1750 N (Applicant) (Responent) : Shri Rupesh R. Shah, Ar Assessee By Revenue By : Smt.Trupti Patel, Sr.Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06/05/2025 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 07/05/2025

For Respondent: Smt.Trupti Patel, Sr.DR
Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

condoning the delay. Application for Admission of Additional Evidence 11. During the course of hearing before us, the assessee moved an application under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963, seeking admission of additional evidence in the form of various documents which, according to the assessee, could not be submitted either during the assessment proceedings or before

NIRA vs. INH KISHORESINH GEHLOT,INDIAVS.CPC, BANGALORE (PRESENT JURISDICTION -INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 5(3)(2), AHMEDABAD), GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1068/AHD/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 1068/Ahd/2023 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19) Niravsinh Kishoresinh Cpc बनाम/ Gehlot Bangalore Vs. Shivam Vasant Chowk, Present Jurisdiction - Dharmaj, Petlad Dist Income Tax Officer Anand, Anand, Gujarat Ward 5(3)(2), Ahmedabad 388430 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Ajtpg6241P (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Shri Balaji V., Ar अपीलाथ" ओर से /Appellant By : ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. Dr 01/02/2024 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement 08/02/2024 O R D E R Per Ms. Madhumita Roy - Jm: The Instant Appeal Filed At The Instance Of The Appellant Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26.10.2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -3, Chennai (‘Cit(A)’) Arising Out Of The Intimation Order Dated 20.03.2020 Passed By The Assessing Officer, Under Section 143(1) Of The Act For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. We Have Heard The Rival Submissions Made By The Respective Parties & We Have Also Perused The Relevant Materials Available On Record.

For Respondent: Shri Sushil Kumar Katiar, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 90

207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent

SOCIETY FOR CREATION OF OPPORTUNITIES THROUGH PROFICIENCY IN ENGLISH (SCOPE),AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(EXEMPTIONS), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 387/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rignesh Das, CIT- DR
Section 10Section 143(1)

condoning the delay, dismissed the appeal on merits. The CIT(Appeals) held that procedural compliance is mandatory, and filing the return in the prescribed form is not a mere technicality but a legal requirement. Since the return was filed in Form ITR-5 instead of ITR-7, the exemption claim was considered invalid. The CIT(A) relied on judicial precedents