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.

185 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 253(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai327Delhi219Chennai216Ahmedabad185Indore182Kolkata170Jaipur140Karnataka139Surat122Bangalore108Chandigarh100Lucknow85Pune69Raipur47Cochin45Panaji43Hyderabad43Cuttack40Nagpur40Rajkot37Allahabad31Patna28Jodhpur22Varanasi19Visakhapatnam17Guwahati14Amritsar12Ranchi9Agra8Jabalpur5SC4Telangana2Dehradun1Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 12A59Addition to Income42Condonation of Delay41Limitation/Time-bar38Section 143(3)31Section 271(1)(c)30Exemption27Section 526Section 132

TIKI TAR INDUSTRIES BARODA LTD,VADODARA vs. THE PR. CIT-2, VADODARA

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

ITA 166/AHD/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad24 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt.Annapurna Gupta & Shri T.R. Senthil Kumarassessment Year :2014-15 Tiki Tar Industries Baroda Ltd. Pr.Cit-2 8Th Floor, Neptune Tower Vs Vadodara. Baroda Productivity Council Alkapuri, Vadodara Pan : Aadct 8382 Q

For Appellant: Shri Akhilendra Pratap Yadav, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 263oSection 3

condonation of delay. Section 5 of the Limitation Act and section 253(5) of the Act provides power to condone

Showing 1–20 of 185 · Page 1 of 10

...
22
Section 2(15)21
Section 1119
Section 80I18

VINEETSINGH GULABSINGH RORE,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PCIT, AHMEDABAD-1, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 868/AHD/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: SMT. ANNAPURNA GUPTA (Accountant Member), Ms. SUCHITRA KAMBLE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Maloo, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prathvi Raj Meena, CIT.DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 253(5)Section 263Section 69

Section 253(5) of the Act. praying for the condonation of the delay. Regret for Delay: I express deep regret

MAHESHRAJ CHEMICALS PVT.LTD.,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DY.CIT.,CIRCLE-4,, AHMEDABAD

In the result the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 791/AHD/2012[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Dec 2018AY 1999-00

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.791/Ahd/2012 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 1999-2000 Dcit, Mahesraj Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. Circle-4, Vs. 141, Phase Ii, Gidc, Vatva, Ahmedabad Ahmedabad-382330 Pan:Aabcm0424C

For Appellant: Smt Urvashi Shodhan, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vinod Talwani, Sr.DR
Section 234BSection 271Section 28Section 36Section 80H

253 ITR 798held as under : "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will

THE GOVERNMENT SERVANTS CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,VADODARA vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), VADODARA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for the statistical purposes

ITA 442/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 442/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-13 The Government Servants Co-Op. Credit I.T.O., Society Ltd., Vs. Ward-3(1)(2), Hindi Bhavan, Vadodara. Sanstha Vasahat Raopura, Vadodara-390001. Pan: Aabat5146J

For Appellant: Shri Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Purushottam Kumar, Sr..D.R
Section 5Section 56Section 80P(2)

condone such inordinate delay. 5. We have perused the records and heard the rival submissions of both the sides. There was a delay of 1226 days in filing the appeal by the assessee before us. Now the controversy arises for our adjudication whether there was genuine cause on the part of the assessee for the delayed filing of appeal

ATULKUMAR KIRTILAL SHAH,,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO, WARD-5(3)(1),, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 2485/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad18 Jun 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri T.C. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 249Section 253Section 5

5 of section 253 which authorise Tribunal to condone the delay in filing appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross

PRISM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1236/AHD/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1235 & 1236/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/ Assessment Year : 2003-04 वष" Prism Industries Limited, Asst. Commissioner Of Tb-5, Vrundavan Estate, Vs Income-Tax, Pashabhai Park, Race Course Circle-4, Circle, Baroda Baroda Pan : Aabcp 7162 Q Assessee By : Shri Mj Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement In Court : 10/04/2018 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri MJ Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(c)

5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression "sufficient cause" employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section

PRISM INDUSTRIES LIMITED,,BARODA vs. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4,, BARODA

In the result, both appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1235/AHD/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad09 Apr 2018AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1235 & 1236/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष"/ Assessment Year : 2003-04 वष" Prism Industries Limited, Asst. Commissioner Of Tb-5, Vrundavan Estate, Vs Income-Tax, Pashabhai Park, Race Course Circle-4, Circle, Baroda Baroda Pan : Aabcp 7162 Q Assessee By : Shri Mj Shah, Ar Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement In Court : 10/04/2018 आदेश आदेश/O R D E R आदेश आदेश

For Appellant: Shri MJ Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(c)

5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit an appeal or permit filing of memorandum of cross- objections after expiry of relevant period, if it is satisfied that there was a sufficient cause for not presenting it within that period. This expression "sufficient cause" employed in the section has also been used identically in sub-section

SHRI DILIP KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2086/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.L. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 50C

condonation of delay on the ground that if in the case of co-owners lower sale consideration for computing the capital gain can be deemed as per section 50C, the same yardstick deserves to be adopted in their cases. 6. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, I have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

SHRI DILIP KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2085/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.L. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 50C

condonation of delay on the ground that if in the case of co-owners lower sale consideration for computing the capital gain can be deemed as per section 50C, the same yardstick deserves to be adopted in their cases. 6. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, I have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

SHRI PINAKIN KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2088/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.L. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 50C

condonation of delay on the ground that if in the case of co-owners lower sale consideration for computing the capital gain can be deemed as per section 50C, the same yardstick deserves to be adopted in their cases. 6. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, I have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

SHRI PINAKIN KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2087/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.L. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 50C

condonation of delay on the ground that if in the case of co-owners lower sale consideration for computing the capital gain can be deemed as per section 50C, the same yardstick deserves to be adopted in their cases. 6. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, I have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

SHRI MANISH KUMARPAL SHAH,,VADODARA vs. THE DY. CIT, CIRCLE-2(1)2,, VADODARA

In the result, appeals of the assessees are dismissed

ITA 2084/AHD/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadavआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2083 & 2084/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Manish Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) Prakash Chemicals Agencies Vs Baroda. Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra 390 002. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2085 & 2086/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2009-10 Shri Dilip Kumarpal Shah Dcit, Cir.2(1)(2) C/O. Trans Indiana Mfg.Co. Vs Baroda. Prakash Chemicals Agencies Mahajan Lane Raopura, Vadodra.

For Appellant: Shri Surendra Modiani, ARFor Respondent: Shri B.L. Meena, Sr.DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 50C

condonation of delay on the ground that if in the case of co-owners lower sale consideration for computing the capital gain can be deemed as per section 50C, the same yardstick deserves to be adopted in their cases. 6. With the assistance of the ld.representatives, I have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

LALITADEVI N. TIBREWALA,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE PR. CIT, , AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

ITA 318/AHD/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Ms. Madhumita Royआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 318/Ahd/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Lalitadevi N. Tibrewala, Pr. Commissioner Of 6, Professor Colony, Vs. Income Tax, Nr. Vijay Cross Roads, Ahmedabad-5 Navrangpura, Ahmedabad-380009. Pan: Aappt0073M

For Appellant: Shri Deepak R. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri A.P. Singh, CIT, D.R with Shri V.K. Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 263Section 54

253 ITR 798held as under : "In exercising discretion under section 5 of the Limitation Act the Courts should adopt a pragmatic approach. A distinction must be made between a case where the delay is inordinate and a case where the delay is of a few days. Whereas in the former case the consideration of prejudice to the other side will

SHRI PRAVINKUMAR HIRALAL VORA,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DCIT, CIRCLE-2, AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 153/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad16 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyalआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.153/Ahd/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 Pravinkumar Hiralal Vora, D.C.I.T., A-71, Trithbhumi Apartment, Vs. Circle-2, Nr. Thakorbhai Desai Hall, Ahmedabad. Law Garden, Ellis Bridge, Ahmedabad-380006. Pan: Abjpv2934B

For Appellant: Shri P.D. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shramdeep Sinha, Sr.D.R
Section 119Section 143(2)Section 254

condoning the delay. In this regard we note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that : “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under "In exercising discretion under section 5

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

delay in filing appeal be not condoned and the appeal be dismissed being time barred. 6. We have considered rival submissions and gone through the record. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

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

delay in filing appeal be not condoned and the appeal be dismissed being time barred. 6. We have considered rival submissions and gone through the record. Sub-section 5 of Section 253

NAVI MASJID MAHFILE HUSEN MADRASE TARKKI ISLAM HUSAINI TEKRI,BANASKANTHA vs. THE ACIT (EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 228/AHD/2021[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Apr 2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Memebr & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Memebr

For Appellant: Shri Vartik Chokshi, Shri
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 5

condoning the delay. In this regard we note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that : “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798held as under : "In exercising discretion under section 5

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

condoning the delay. In this regard we note that the Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Sreenivas Charitable Trust v. Dy. CIT reported in 280 ITR 357 has held that : “3. The Supreme Court in Vedabai v. Shantaram Baburao Patil [2002] 253 ITR 798 held as under: "In exercising discretion under section 5

PEPPERAZZI HOSPITALITY PVT. LTD,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(2), AHMEDABAD

In the result, the appeal is dismissed

ITA 448/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad08 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Final Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Hem Chajad, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 253Section 5

condone delay: “The expression ‘sufficient cause or reason’ as provided in sub- section (5) of section 253 of the Act is used

AADIJATI VIKAS PRAGATI MAHAMANDAL,VYARA vs. THE CIT(EXEMPTION), AHMEDABAD

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

ITA 708/AHD/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad26 Jun 2025

Bench: S/Shri T.R. Senthil Kumar & Makarand V.Mahadeokar

For Respondent: Shri R.P. Rastogi, CIT
Section 12ASection 253(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

condone delay under section 253(5) of the Act, the Tribunal is required to adopt a liberal and justice-oriented