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.

9 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 245clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai128Karnataka104Chennai101Kolkata81Delhi58Bangalore37Jaipur26Pune25Chandigarh11Hyderabad11Cuttack11Ahmedabad9Ranchi8Indore8Lucknow7SC6Varanasi5Surat5Guwahati4Visakhapatnam3Amritsar3Nagpur3Panaji2Cochin2Dehradun1Raipur1Rajasthan1Agra1Calcutta1Andhra Pradesh1Telangana1Allahabad1Patna1

Key Topics

Section 14710Section 2508Addition to Income7Section 1484Section 1444Section 69A4Section 2634Section 80I4Section 143(2)

ANILKUMAR DWARKAPRASAD MODANI,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1)(PREVIOUSLY DY.CIT, CIRCLE-3(1)), VADODARA

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

ITA 1572/AHD/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Nov 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokarआयकर अपील सं /Ita No.1572/Ahd/2024 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2013-14 Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani The Dy.Cit बनाम/ A-17, Videocon Housing Colony Circle-2(1)(1) V/S. Chavaj, Bharuch 392 002 Vadodara (Gujarat) "थायी लेखा सं./Pan:Acnpm 0273 C अपीलाथ&/ (Appellant) '( यथ&/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Hemant Suthar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 21/11/2024 आदेश/O R D E R Per Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Am: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 26/12/2023 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “Cit(A)”] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2013-14, In Which The Addition Made By The Assessing Officer [Hereinafter Referred To As “Ao)”] Under Section 50C Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”] Was Confirmed Vide Assessment Order Dated 28/03/2016. Facts Of The Case: 2. The Assessee, An Individual Earning Income From Salaries, Trading In Shares & Securities, Capital Gains & Other Sources, Filed His Return Of Anilkumar Dwarkaprasad Modani Vs. The Dcit Asst. Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Suthar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Kumar, Sr.DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)
3
Penalty3
Unexplained Money2
Cash Deposit2
Section 50C
Section 50C(2)

Section 245 of the Act, adjusting the refund against the outstanding demand, prompting the assessee to inquire about the status of the appeal. Upon realizing that the appeal was not filed, immediate steps were taken to file it on 02.09.2024, resulting in a delay of 191 days. The assessee has supported his application for condonation

MIKAL BHUPENDRABHAI PATEL,PETLAD vs. I.T.O WARD 1(3)(1), PETLAD, PETLAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 474/AHD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jainish Parikh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

245/- and other credit entries aggregating to Rs. 28,10,000/- in the IndusInd Bank account as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and added the total sum of Rs. 53,15,500/- to the total ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025 Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2012-13 - 3– income of the assessee. The total assessed

MIKAL BHUPENDRABHAI PATEL,PETLAD vs. I.T.O WARD 1(3)(1), PETLAD, PETLAD

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 473/AHD/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad17 Oct 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. Brr Kumar & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Jainish Parikh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Abhijit, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 69A

245/- and other credit entries aggregating to Rs. 28,10,000/- in the IndusInd Bank account as unexplained money under section 69A of the Act and added the total sum of Rs. 53,15,500/- to the total ITA Nos. 473&474/Ahd/2025 Mikal Bhupendrabhai Patel vs. ITO Asst.Years–2011-12 & 2012-13 - 3– income of the assessee. The total assessed

RAJESH AMARSINH PRAJAPATI,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-3(2)(4), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 94/AHD/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad27 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ankit Jain, Sr. DR
Section 1Section 120(3)(a)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 274

245, 246, 141, 311(2), 300(A), 365(29) of the Indian Constitution? Whether the CIT(A) was correct in law in grossly dismissing the appeal without considering the facts and merits of the case and not paying due consideration to the contentions of the Appellant and passing appellate order and upholding the illegal addition?” 3. The brief facts

VAISHALI BABUBHAI PATEL,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT-3, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 380/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad10 Apr 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकरअपीलसं./ Ita No. 380/Ahd/2020 धििाधरणवरध/Asstt. Year: 2015-2016 Vaishali Babubhai Patel, The Principal Commissioner B-201, Vs. Of Income Tax-3, Gala Gardenia Apartments, Ahmedabad. Nr. Safal Parisar, South Bopal, Ahmedabad-380058. Pan: Abdpp0233G

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr.Advocate with Shri Parimalsinh B Parmar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Durga Dutt, CIT. DR
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54F

condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee and proceed to adjudicate the issue on merit. 3. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the Ld. PCIT under section 263 of the Act erred in holding the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Act, as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest

WORLD ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NATIONAL ASSESSMENT CENTRE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT PRESENT JURISDICTION THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-1(1), BHAVNAGAR

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

ITA 40/AHD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad07 Oct 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Year: 2021-22

Section 144Section 69C

245/-. Therefore, the purchases in the ITR was held as inflated and the difference of Rs.8,04,92,126/- in the two purchase figures was added to the income of the assessee. The assessment was completed under Section 144 r.w.s 144B of the Act on 13.12.2022 at total income of Rs.7,85,19,216/-. 3. Aggrieved with the order

RASNA PVT. LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR.CIT, -3, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 278/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Waseem Ahmedasstt.Year 2015-16

For Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Jain, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 80I

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal of the assessee on merit. 4. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee-company has filed its return of income on 28.11.2015 declaring total income at Rs.9,08,58,880/-. The assessee-company at the relevant time was engaged in manufacturing and trading of soft drink concentrate/mixes and bakery

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3217/AHD/2015[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1992-93

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

condoning it, nor would it become a principal or a sharer in the illegality. The revenue merely looks at an accomplished fact, viz of profits having been earned and assesses the same. The assessee may be prosecuted for the crime and yet be charged on the profit (Mann v. Nash 16 TC 523). To hold otherwise would

SHRI MUKESH RASIKLAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-9, NOW CIRCLE-4(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are hereby dismissed

ITA 3218/AHD/2015[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Dec 2024AY 1993-94

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Vice-Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh R. Shah – Party in personFor Respondent: Shri Karun Kant Ojha, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 153Section 250

condoning it, nor would it become a principal or a sharer in the illegality. The revenue merely looks at an accomplished fact, viz of profits having been earned and assesses the same. The assessee may be prosecuted for the crime and yet be charged on the profit (Mann v. Nash 16 TC 523). To hold otherwise would