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.

103 results for “condonation of delay”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,884Mumbai1,765Delhi1,115Pune1,017Bangalore979Kolkata878Patna658Hyderabad482Ahmedabad433Jaipur394Nagpur338Cochin308Chandigarh233Indore183Surat160Lucknow152Raipur146Visakhapatnam125Panaji123Karnataka114Cuttack104Amritsar103Rajkot97Dehradun38Agra36Jodhpur35Calcutta34SC32Varanasi23Allahabad23Telangana23Guwahati22Jabalpur12Ranchi9Orissa5Rajasthan3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana2Andhra Pradesh1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Section 143(1)56Section 153A54Section 139(1)47Addition to Income45Section 26340Condonation of Delay38Deduction36Section 14435Section 154

VEENA KHINDRI,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

In the result, Assessee's appeal is allowed

ITA 443/ASR/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Mar 2025AY 2021-22
For Appellant: Shri Rohit Kapoor, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. Neelam Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 250(6)

condonation of delay.\n6.\nBrief facts of the case as per the order of the Addl. CIT(A) is as\nunder:-\n\"The appellant is an individual and has filed its\nreturn\nof income for A.Y. 2021-22 on 25/03/2022 (revised\nreturn) showing taxable income of Rs. 12,65,180/-.\nThe Assessing Officer vide order

PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER - TDS-1, JALANDHAR

Showing 1–20 of 103 · Page 1 of 6

34
Section 1031
Section 143(3)30
Exemption23

In the result, the appeals filed are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 646/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 156Section 194CSection 249Section 264Section 5

delay in filing the appeal before him from 01.04.2014 to 17.07.2014 and the same may please be condoned and appeal may please be heard on merits. 2. That the Assessing Officer has legally erred in law and facts for treating the assessee as a person liable to deduct

PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals filed are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 645/ASR/2019[20103-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023

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

Section 156Section 194CSection 249Section 264Section 5

delay in filing the appeal before him from 01.04.2014 to 17.07.2014 and the same may please be condoned and appeal may please be heard on merits. 2. That the Assessing Officer has legally erred in law and facts for treating the assessee as a person liable to deduct

PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION,HOSHIARPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS-1`, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeals filed are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 644/ASR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar31 Jan 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 156Section 194CSection 249Section 264Section 5

delay in filing the appeal before him from 01.04.2014 to 17.07.2014 and the same may please be condoned and appeal may please be heard on merits. 2. That the Assessing Officer has legally erred in law and facts for treating the assessee as a person liable to deduct

M.K HOTELS & RESORTS LIMITED,AMRITSAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONE OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1, AMRITSAR

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

ITA 57/ASR/2021[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar01 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 245Section 250oSection 80I

deduction u/s 80IB was rejected in processing of return u/s 143(1). The ld. counsel further mentioned that during appeal the assessee submitted the affidavit with petition for condonation of delay

LATE SH BHAGAT CHAJJU RAM MEMORIAL TRUST,JAMMU vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 500/ASR/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

delay before the JCIT (A) and before Tribunal are condones and these appeals are admitted. ITA No. 497/Asr/2024 (assessment year 2017-18). 6. From the record, it is evident that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 10.06.2019 in which the returned income was accepted by the AO. Thus, the intimation order u/s 143(1)(a) dated

LATE SH BHAGAT CHAJJU RAM MEMORIAL TRUST,JAMMU vs. ITO EXEMPTION, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 499/ASR/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

delay before the JCIT (A) and before Tribunal are condones and these appeals are admitted. ITA No. 497/Asr/2024 (assessment year 2017-18). 6. From the record, it is evident that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 10.06.2019 in which the returned income was accepted by the AO. Thus, the intimation order u/s 143(1)(a) dated

LATE SH BHAGAT CHAJJU RAM MEMORIAL TRUST,JAMMU vs. ITO, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 497/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

delay before the JCIT (A) and before Tribunal are condones and these appeals are admitted. ITA No. 497/Asr/2024 (assessment year 2017-18). 6. From the record, it is evident that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 10.06.2019 in which the returned income was accepted by the AO. Thus, the intimation order u/s 143(1)(a) dated

LATE SH BHAGAT CHAJJU RAM,JAMMU vs. ITO EXEMPTION JAMMU, JAMMU

In the result, the captioned four appeals of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 498/ASR/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing)

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

delay before the JCIT (A) and before Tribunal are condones and these appeals are admitted. ITA No. 497/Asr/2024 (assessment year 2017-18). 6. From the record, it is evident that the assessment was completed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 10.06.2019 in which the returned income was accepted by the AO. Thus, the intimation order u/s 143(1)(a) dated

VOLUNTARY MEDCARE SOCIETY,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ( EXEMPTIONS) WARD , JAMMU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 262/ASR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Nov 2023AY 2018-19

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

Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 12A(1)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

deduction u/s. 11 empowered by the CBDT Instruction No 3I.T.A. No.262/Asr/2023 3 Assessment Year: 2018-19 173/193/2019-ITA-1 dated 23/4/2019 and CBDT Circular No-6/2020 dated 19/02/2020. The delay for filing the return and Form 10B are condoned

SHRI AMRITPAL SINGH (PROP),JALANDHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 1, JALANDHAR

In the result, appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 425/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar13 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

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

Section 110Section 263Section 54D

delay for 14 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order passed by worthy PCIT -1 is arbitrary, whimsical, bad in law and deserves to be quashed. 2. That in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the order

ROYAL FURNISHER ,JAMMU vs. ASSESING OFFICER WARD- 2 (2), JAMMU

In the result appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 54/ASR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Dec 2022AY 2018-19

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

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 250oSection 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

condoned. 4. Tersely we advert the fact of the case. The addition was made for delayed payment of PF and ESI amount of Rs. 4,16,169/-before the close of the financial year and Rs.71,818/- on 18.04.2018 related to EPF payable. The assessee filed an I.T.A. No.54/Asr/2022 4 Assessment Year: 2018-19 appeal before

SHRI AMRIT PARKASH SEHGAL (HUF),JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 12/ASR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Surinder Mahajan, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Amlendu Nath Misra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 154Section 263

condoned the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 7. The assessee has filed return declaring an income of Rs. 25,08,770/- (APB pg. no. 4-7) and that the assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act by making an addition of Rs.4,26,748/- (APB pg. no. 66-67). Subsequently, proceedings

SHRI ZAFFAR MEHRAJ SHAH,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3 (3), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 18/ASR/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Apr 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh.P. N. Arora, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Manpreet Singh Duggal, Sr. D. R
Section 250

deduction as claimed under Chapter VIA at Rs.1,00,000/-. 3 I.T.A. No. 18/Asr/2024 A.Y. 2009-10 6. That any other ground of appeal which may be urged at the time of hearing of the appeal.” 3. The registry has marked this appeal as time-barred by 98 days, the ld. counsel of the assessee has filed an affidavit

INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 (2), MUKTSAR vs. AJAIB SINGH, VILLAGE BHARU

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 354/ASR/2024[2012]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Jun 2025

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 354/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 250Section 54B

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 3. The grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 are as under: “(i) On the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting addition of Rs.3,68,15,000/- made on account of long term capital gain on sale of residential land

SHRI TARA CHAND S/O SHRI GOURI SHANKER ,KATHUA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, KATHUA

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

ITA 15/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 69A

delay of 44 days is condoned. The appeal of assessee is taken for hearing. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds: “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts dismissing the appeal, as assessee fail to file reply due to the reasons beyond his control. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred

SHRI MUZAFFAR JAN PAMPORI ,SRINAGRAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -3 ( 2), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 134/ASR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Jun 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 144

delay of 8 days is hereby condoned. The appeal is admitted to be heard on merits. 3. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessment order was passed u/s 144 of the Income Tax by the AO ex- parte qua the assessee without granting an adequate opportunity of being 3 I.T.A. No. 134/Asr/2023 Muzaffar

SHRI RAJINDER KUMAR,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1 (3), JALANDHAR

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

ITA 262/ASR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar19 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.262/Asr/2022 Assessment Year: 2012-13

Section 144Section 250o

delay for 139 days is condoned. 3. Brief fact of the case is that the assessment was completed u/s 144 with addition amount of Rs.12,13,420/- related long term capital gain. During assessment the assessee was totally non cooperative. As a result, the assessment was passed ex parte. Aggrieved assessee filed an appeal before

M/S. PINKU BATRA ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

ITA 323/ASR/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2010-11

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

Section 144Section 153A

deductions, allowance or relief.” 6.12. Respectful observation of this order which is stated that during processing of return u/s 143(1) there is no application of mind. In this factual interpretation the addition was made u/s 2(22)(e) related to deemed dividend such shares invested by the assessee to the company where he has the substantial interest. This particular

M/S. PINKU BATRA ,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, JALANDHAR

In the result, the particular issue u/s 153C of the Act related in ITA

ITA 322/ASR/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

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

Section 144Section 153A

deductions, allowance or relief.” 6.12. Respectful observation of this order which is stated that during processing of return u/s 143(1) there is no application of mind. In this factual interpretation the addition was made u/s 2(22)(e) related to deemed dividend such shares invested by the assessee to the company where he has the substantial interest. This particular