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.

170 results for “condonation of delay”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai987Mumbai609Delhi526Ahmedabad426Kolkata405Pune374Hyderabad365Bangalore347Jaipur235Chandigarh211Amritsar170Indore148Visakhapatnam145Cochin143Surat140Lucknow129Patna127Rajkot116Raipur106Agra86Nagpur72Cuttack62Panaji62Calcutta37Jabalpur28Allahabad27Guwahati25Karnataka24Jodhpur23Varanasi11Dehradun10Ranchi6SC5Telangana3

Key Topics

Section 14486Addition to Income82Section 25067Condonation of Delay62Natural Justice50Cash Deposit48Section 250(6)45Section 14740Section 148

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), ABOHAR, INCOME TAX OFFICE, ABOHAR vs. RAJ KUMAR, ABOHAR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 622/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rajendra Jain, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 4. Grounds of appeal taken by the revenue in Form No. 36 are as follows (which is not concise in terms of Rule – 8 of ITAT Rules ’63): “1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition

SHRI SATBIR SINGH BHULLAR,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 5 (4), AMRITSAR

Showing 1–20 of 170 · Page 1 of 9

...
39
Section 153A38
Section 69A36
Depreciation27

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

ITA 258/ASR/2022[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar02 Mar 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 250oSection 68

cash was deposited in bank out of agriculture income earned by the assessee during the year under consideration. I.T.A. No.258/Asr/2022 3 Assessment Year: 2008-09 6. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 737948/- made by the Ld. AO by alleging that the assessee made a bald statement in respect of ownership of agriculture

SH. NIRBHAY TREHAN,JAMMU vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 184/ASR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 250

delay of 02 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. AO has erred in opening of the assessment by recording false reasons under section 148 (1) of the Income Tax Act. 2. The Ld. AO has erred in recording reasons on the basis of surmises

SMT. BANI TREHAN,JAMMU vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 182/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 250

delay of 02 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. AO has erred in opening of the assessment by recording false reasons under section 148 (1) of the Income Tax Act. 2. The Ld. AO has erred in recording reasons on the basis of surmises

SH. NIRBHAY TREHAN,JAMMU vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, JAMMU

In the result, the appeals of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 183/ASR/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 139Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 2Section 250

delay of 02 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. AO has erred in opening of the assessment by recording false reasons under section 148 (1) of the Income Tax Act. 2. The Ld. AO has erred in recording reasons on the basis of surmises

SHRI HARBANS SINGH MANN,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (4), MANSA

In the result, the ground no

ITA 129/ASR/2022[2010-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2010-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.129/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2010-11

Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 250oSection 69A

delay of 128 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following concise grounds: “1. That the Ld. CIT (Appeals), has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in issuing the notice u/s 148 and with regard to reopening of the case. 2. That there was no reason to believe as per the reasons recorded

DAVINDER SINGH BHULLAR,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KAPURTHALA

In the result, the captioned appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 587/ASR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lalmeena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Ble

Section 144Section 147Section 69A

delay of 60 days in filing this appeal has been condoned and the appeal is admitted on merits. 4. The sole issue challenged by the assesse is related to treatment of cash deposits

LATE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH,MOGA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MOGA

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee is allowed for

ITA 50/ASR/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 250(6)Section 69

cash deposits made by assessee in his bank account. 3. That the assessee craves to leave, amend, alter or take additional grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing.” 3. The ld. DR has stated that she has no objection to the condonation of the short delay

SHRI GURDEV SINGH ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DASUYA

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 30/ASR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar04 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 144Section 147Section 250

delay for 1196 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. That the order passed by the Hon’ble CIT (A) dated 20.06.2019 is against the law and facts of the case. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon’ble CIT (A) has erred in law and on facts

SHRI GAMDOOR SINGH ,MANSA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 1 (5), MANSA

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

ITA 149/ASR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 68

delay was condoned. In view of above said facts, it is submitted that the CIT(A), was not justified in not condoning the appeal.” 6. At the outset, the following undisputed for your Honor’s kind consideration: 6.1 The Appellant and his family own agriculture land measuring 64 acres. 6.2 53.50 acres of the said agriculture land has been given

SHRI ALLAH RAKHA,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KATHUA

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

ITA 230/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 250Section 250oSection 68

cash deposits and other credits amounting to Rs.59,90,000/- in saving bank accounts maintained by the assessee. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or otherwise raise any other ground of appeal.” 2. Assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay

SMT. RAJINDER KAUR,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, DASUYA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 171/ASR/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 1Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263

delay in filing appeal is condoned and appeal admitted on merits. 4. The Ld. PCIT observed that the assessment has been finalized by the Assessing Officer, without carrying out the necessary verification regarding source of cash deposited

HINDVEE SMALL FINANCE LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(3) JAMMU, JAMMU

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

ITA 215/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. K. L. Moolchandani, Adv
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 250Section 68Section 69

deposit of necessary tribunal appeal fees, on 18th April, 2024, which was belated by fifty one (51 days) and he prays for condonation of the said delay, which was neither intentional nor willful. 5. The Ld DR did not object to the said application for condonation. 5 I.T.A. No. 215/Asr/2024 Hindvee Small Finance Ltd. v. ITO 6. Considering the reasons

SMT..ANURADHA,PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-6(1), PATHANKOT

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 437/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Jun 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 133(6)Section 147Section 148Section 151(1)Section 250

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing on merits. 3. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in Form 36 are as follows: “1. That on the facts & in circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT (A) erred in confirming the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer & dismissing the appeal. 2. That

AMANDIP SIINGH,HOUSE NO. NEAR NEHAR PATTI vs. ITO WARD 1, TARN TARAN, ITO WARD , TARN TARAN SARHALI ROAD

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

ITA 414/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2013-14]

Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 221(1)Section 250

condone the delay of 183 days and admit this appeal for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case:- In this case, on the basis of information from the DIT(I&CI), Chandigarh that the assessee had made cash deposit

SHRI MOHAMMAD AMIN SOFI,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 358/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone, C.A
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250(6)Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. Brief facts emerging from the records are that the assessee has deposited cash

SHRI VIJAY KUMAR,GARHSHANKAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, HOSIARPUR

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

ITA 27/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. J. S. Bhasin, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Ratinder Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 69A

delay is hereby condoned. Appeal admitted on merits. 3. Briefly facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 30.03.2017 declaring income of Rs. 2,83,070/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS for the year 2015-16 and notice u/s 143(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was served upon the assessee

PUNNU SYNTHETICS PRIVATE LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 5 (4), AMRITSAR

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

ITA 35/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 144oSection 250(6)Section 250oSection 69A

cash deposited and credit entries by invoking section 69A. That the provisions of section 69A can be invoked only when whole of such alleged money, bullion, jewellery, or valuable article has escaped assessment or remains unexplained. 10. That the appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is heard and disposed

SHRI MANJIT SINGH ,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD , DASUYA

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

ITA 132/ASR/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Aug 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 44A

cash deposited in the bank-account of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee files this appeal. 3. That the assessee requests to add or amend the grounds 'of appeal before the same is heard or disposed off.” 3. The appeal of the assessee was filed with delay of 17 days. The assessee filed the petition for condonation

SH. FARUKH JEHAN ZEB ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ANANT NAG

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 444/ASR/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Aug 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Sh. Touseef Ahmad Khanday &For Respondent: Sh. S. M. Surendranath, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 68

delay of 8 days in filing the appeal has been 3 Farukh Ahmad Zeb v. ITO condoned on oral request mad by the Ld. AR at the time of hearing and appeal admitted for hearing on merits. 3. Briefly the facts as per record are that the AO received STR information from Chief Manager J&K Bank Ltd., Pampore which