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.

29 results for “condonation of delay”+ Demonetizationclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai275Hyderabad149Bangalore94Kolkata85Mumbai85Delhi82Ahmedabad68Patna59Jaipur58Pune54Visakhapatnam53Lucknow51Surat34Chandigarh33Panaji31Rajkot29Amritsar29Indore26Agra23Raipur21Cuttack16Allahabad10Nagpur10Cochin7Jodhpur6Jabalpur4Dehradun2Ranchi1Calcutta1Varanasi1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 14431Section 25028Demonetization28Addition to Income24Condonation of Delay24Section 69A21Cash Deposit19Section 142(1)10Section 143(3)

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

demonetization period represents sale proceeds realized during the year. 8. That the Id. CIT(Appeals) has erred in ignoring the submissions and evidence brought on record by the assessee to explain the genuineness of the business income surrendered by the assessee. I.T.A. No.35/Asr/2023 4 Assessment Year: 2017-18 9. That Ld. CIT(Appeals) has erred in confirming the action

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

8
Section 2825
Section 250(6)5
Penalty5

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 in his bank account during the demonetization

IRFAN SHAH,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 381/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Kundan Pandey for Sh. Vipul Arora C.A
Section 115BSection 144Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: “1. That the Worthy Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals) has, in view of the facts and circumstance of the case, grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.3240500 on account of cash deposited during demonetization

BIKRAM MASIH,AMRITSAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(1), AMRITSAR

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

ITA 569/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 144Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

condone the delay, being not intentional or willful, on the part of the assessee and we admit the appeal for hearing on merits. There are thirteen grounds taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 and the first 6. issue is on the grounds of rejection of the appeal by the ld. first appellate authority refusing to admit the same

NARCHOOR COMPANY ANANTNAG ( FORMER PARTNER -ABDUL HAMEED NARCHOOR) RAYEES AHMAD KOUL ,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, UDHAMPUR

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

ITA 300/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C.A
Section 144Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 6. There are seven grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 and the main grievance of the assessee is that the appeal has been disposed of by the ld. CIT(A) without affording reasonable and proper opportunity of hearing

RAMEEZ RAJA BHAT,BUGAM BATAPORA CHADOORA BUDGAM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2 SRINAGAR, SILK FACTORY ROAD RAJBAGH SRINAGAR

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

ITA 198/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: None (Written submission)
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be decided on merits. 5. The assessee has taken eight grounds of appeal and all the grounds are related to the addition sustained by the Ld. first appellate authority, on account of SBN deposits of Rs. 13.31 lakhs treated as unexplained u/s 69A plus an addition of Rs. 10.49 lakhs as business

SHRI SAJAD RASOOL KHAN,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, SRINAGR

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

ITA 23/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Udayan Das Gupta & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

condone the delay of 353 days and admit this appeal for hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case:- In this case, the Assessing Officer had information that the assessee had deposited cash of Rs.13,99,600/- during the demonetization

FAQIR CHAND PROP FAQIR CHAND & SONS R S PURA JAMMU,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) JAMMU AAYKAR BHAWAN RAIL HEAD COMPLEX PANAMA CHOWK JAMMU, JAMMU

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

ITA 91/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 4. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 and the first three grounds relates to the issue that proper opportunity of hearing has not been allowed by the ld. first appellate authority and there was no proper service of notice and as such

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

condone the delay, and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 7. The brief facts of this case are that the appellant company is engaged in the business of hire purchase financing of tourist vehicles and loans are advanced to small tour operators and taxi drivers, for purchase of vehicles, who are located mainly in the state of Jammu

SHRI ABDUL AHAD WANI,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 362/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C. A
Section 144Section 250Section 282

condone the delay being not intentional or willful on the part of the assessee and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal and main objection of the assessee is that the order has been passed by the ld. first appellate authority without allowing proper opportunity of hearing and without adjudicating

SHRI MOHAMMAD AMIN BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 378/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C. A
Section 144Section 250Section 282

condone the delay being not intentional or willful on the part of the assessee and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal and main objection of the assessee is that the order has been passed by the ld. first appellate authority without allowing proper opportunity of hearing and without adjudicating

RAJNEESH MEHRA,AMRITSAR vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), AMRITSAR

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

ITA 607/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, Adv. &
Section 144Section 249(3)Section 250

demonetization period in Oriental Bank of Commerce (OBC) A/c No. xxxxxxx00599, apart from other credit entries appearing in the said bank account which is in the name of M/s Purab Infrastructure Projects Ltd. in which the assessee is one of the Director. 4. It is further observed by the AO that there has been a deposit of Rs.21.06 lakhs

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

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

ITA 298/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: None
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271ASection 282Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: “1. The worthy Income Tax Officer erred in completing the assessment by making an addition u/s 69A of Rs.993500/- against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3 I.T.A. No. 298/Asr/2024 Bhushan Kumar

SHRI ADIL KHURSHID BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, UDHAMPUR

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

ITA 575/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: None (Adjournment application)
Section 144Section 156Section 250

condoned by the ld. first appellate authority. 7. The ld. DR relied on the order of the ld. CIT(A) but has no objection if the matter is remanded back. 8. Considering the records, we find that the justice will be served if the matter is remanded back to the files of the ld. first appellate authority for looking

ABDUL MAJID WARD NO 6 MOHALLA RADIO STATSION HAVELI POONCH ,POONCH vs. ROMESH KUMAR SHARMA INCOME TAX OFFICER JAMMU, JAMMU

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

ITA 374/ASR/2023[ASSESSMENT YEAR 2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Feb 2025

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahayi.T.A. No.374/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 44ASection 69A

condone the delay of 36 days and admit this appeal for hearing on merits. 4. The facts of the case are that the assessee had deposited an amount of Rs.13,19,000/- in cash in his bank a/c in J & K Bank at Poonch in A/c No.XXXXXXX0003 during the demonetization

BHATIA MEDICOS,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-(3)1_, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 688/ASR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Jul 2025AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal & Sh. Anil Miglani, Adv
Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 4. Grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 are as follows: “1. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is against law and facts of the case on the file. 3 I.T.A. No. 688/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2. That

SHRI AJAY BALI ,SAMBA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD , SAMBA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee ITA No

ITA 245/ASR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjeei.T.A. No.245/Asr/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 44ASection 69

delay of 40 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following ground: “1. That the Assessment Order dated 18/12/2019 passed by the Income Tax Officer, WardSamba u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi thereby confirming the order

DILAWAR KOCHAY,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER ANANTNAG, ANANTNAG

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

ITA 48/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vaseem Ahmad, C. A
Section 144Section 144ASection 250(6)Section 69A

delay is condoned and the appeal admitted to be heard on merits. 3. Grounds of Appeal taken by the assessee in Form No. 36 are as under: “1. The Ld. CIT A was not justified in refusing to decide on ground no 1 & 2 raised in the appeal on the plea that the assessee has not mentioned on which action

RAJ KUMAR & CO,NAWANSHAHR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NAWANSHAHR

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

ITA 641/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ashray Sarna, Adv
Section 115Section 115BSection 144Section 250Section 68

condone the delay of 253 days, in filing the appeal and admit the same for hearing on merits. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: “1. That the order passed by the Hon'ble CIT(A) dated 15.01.2024 is against the law and facts of the case. 2. That having regard

TURNA COLD STORE THROUGH C/O SH. ROHITB ARORA. ,SHAHKOT vs. INCOMEV TAX OFFICER WARD, NAKODAR

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

ITA 100/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Nirmal Mahajan, C. A
Section 250Section 270ASection 44A

condone the delay and admit the appeal. 5. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee has made cash deposit in bank account during the demonetization