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.

94 results for “condonation of delay”+ Penaltyclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,436Mumbai1,386Delhi952Pune751Kolkata586Ahmedabad528Jaipur451Bangalore402Hyderabad367Chandigarh244Surat241Cochin241Indore185Karnataka175Lucknow158Raipur154Nagpur153Visakhapatnam141Cuttack132Rajkot118Amritsar94Patna75Agra63Calcutta54Guwahati52Panaji31Ranchi31Allahabad30Dehradun29SC27Jabalpur25Jodhpur20Varanasi13Telangana12Orissa4Punjab & Haryana2Himachal Pradesh2Rajasthan1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Penalty68Condonation of Delay64Section 25058Addition to Income41Section 26339Section 143(3)37Section 14736Section 271(1)(b)32Section 271B

THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TARN TARAN vs. ESTATE OF LATE SH. JAGIR SINGH BHULLAR, TARN TARAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 591/ASR/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.306/Asr/2014 & 591/Asr/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Estate Of Sh. Jagir Singh Bhullar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Through S. Jasbir—Singh Ward-1(3), Bhullar, Tarn Taran, E-250 Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab. Punjab.

For Appellant: Sh. Padam Bahl, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass , DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 168Section 263Section 271(1)

delay was condoned and Ld. AR was directed to proceed with his arguments. 4. The Ld. AR at the outset submitted that the case of the assessee was covered in favour of assessee by the order of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of C. S. Atwal and others Vs. CIT. 5. The Ld. DR fairly agreed that

Showing 1–20 of 94 · Page 1 of 5

31
Section 271(1)(c)30
Section 44A28
Natural Justice19

ESTATE OF SH. JAGIR SINGH BHULLAR,AMRITSAR. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, TARN TARAN

In the result, the appeals of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 306/ASR/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Choudhry, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita Nos.306/Asr/2014 & 591/Asr/2015 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08) Estate Of Sh. Jagir Singh Bhullar Vs. Income Tax Officer, Through S. Jasbir—Singh Ward-1(3), Bhullar, Tarn Taran, E-250 Ranjit Avenue, Amritsar, Punjab. Punjab.

For Appellant: Sh. Padam Bahl, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass , DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 168Section 263Section 271(1)

delay was condoned and Ld. AR was directed to proceed with his arguments. 4. The Ld. AR at the outset submitted that the case of the assessee was covered in favour of assessee by the order of Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of C. S. Atwal and others Vs. CIT. 5. The Ld. DR fairly agreed that

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

condonation of delay with the support of affidavit of the appellant assesse, as under: “1. That applicant has filed appeal against order u/s 263 of the Act dated 28.03.2021 passed by Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Jalandhar received by assessee on 01.04.2021. 2. That appeal against order u/s 263 of the Act was required to be filed

EXEXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE ,SRI NAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC ( TDS ), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 137/ASR/2021[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

delay of in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and these appeals are admitted for hearing on merits. 5. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has not been provided the proper opportunity of being heard; that the appellate orders have been passed without granting any opportunity of being heard is in violation

EXEXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE ,SRI NAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), SRI NAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 136/ASR/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

delay of in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and these appeals are admitted for hearing on merits. 5. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has not been provided the proper opportunity of being heard; that the appellate orders have been passed without granting any opportunity of being heard is in violation

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE,SRI NAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC( TDS), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 133/ASR/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

delay of in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and these appeals are admitted for hearing on merits. 5. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has not been provided the proper opportunity of being heard; that the appellate orders have been passed without granting any opportunity of being heard is in violation

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE,SRINAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 135/ASR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

delay of in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and these appeals are admitted for hearing on merits. 5. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has not been provided the proper opportunity of being heard; that the appellate orders have been passed without granting any opportunity of being heard is in violation

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER FLORICULTURE,SRINAGAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF NCOME TAX CPC ( TDS), SRINAGAR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 134/ASR/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Oct 2022AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 250

delay of in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and these appeals are admitted for hearing on merits. 5. At the outset, the ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has not been provided the proper opportunity of being heard; that the appellate orders have been passed without granting any opportunity of being heard is in violation

SHRI. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BATHINDA

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 40/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Puri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 263Section 269SSection 271D

condonation of delay supported by the requisite affidavit. The reason of delay, as submitted by the assessee, is that the order of Ld. CIT(A) was passed on 18/05/2018. But the counsel of the assessee to whom the work of first-appeal before Ld. CIT(A) was entrusted, had mentioned his own name, address, phone number and email

SH. MANJIT KRISHAN MALHOTRA,ABOHAR vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCME TAX , BATHINDA

The appeals of the assessee are disposed of in the terms indicated as above

ITA 39/ASR/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sh. Anil Puri, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 263Section 269SSection 271D

condonation of delay supported by the requisite affidavit. The reason of delay, as submitted by the assessee, is that the order of Ld. CIT(A) was passed on 18/05/2018. But the counsel of the assessee to whom the work of first-appeal before Ld. CIT(A) was entrusted, had mentioned his own name, address, phone number and email

SMT KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

ITA 5/ASR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2009-10

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

condonation of delay is dismissed." 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also.” 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. We find that for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10, the assessment order is already disposed of and rejected. So, there

SMT. KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

ITA 1/ASR/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2004-05

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

condonation of delay is dismissed." 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also.” 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. We find that for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10, the assessment order is already disposed of and rejected. So, there

SMT KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOE TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

ITA 2/ASR/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2005-06

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

condonation of delay is dismissed." 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also.” 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. We find that for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10, the assessment order is already disposed of and rejected. So, there

SMT KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

ITA 3/ASR/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2006-07

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

condonation of delay is dismissed." 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also.” 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. We find that for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10, the assessment order is already disposed of and rejected. So, there

SMT. KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSHIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

ITA 6/ASR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

condonation of delay is dismissed." 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also.” 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. We find that for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10, the assessment order is already disposed of and rejected. So, there

SMT. KRISHNA DEVI EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE SOCIETY ,HOSIARPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also

ITA 4/ASR/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2008-09

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 250(6)Section 271Section 271(1)(b)Section 274

condonation of delay is dismissed." 5. In the result, the appeal is dismissed both being barred by time limitation and on merits also.” 7. We heard the rival submission and considered the documents available in the record. We find that for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10, the assessment order is already disposed of and rejected. So, there

SUMAN CHHABRA,JAMMU AND KASHMIR vs. WARD 1(1), JAMMU, JAMMU AND KASHMIR

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

ITA 191/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 191/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18

Section 147Section 250Section 270A

penalty imposed by the AO Ward 1(1), Jammu passed u/s 270A of the Act, vide order dated 25.08.2022. 2. Condonation of delay

SHRI JASWANT SINGH,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD - 4 (3), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 220/ASR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 144Section 147Section 249(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condoning the delay, ought to have adjudicated the issues of law and facts raised in its appeal by the assessee. 5. That ld.CIT(A)/NFAC was not justified in impliedly confirming the addition pf Rs.33,59,502/- as made by the Id.AO by way of an ex-parte order. 6. That the order under appeal is wholly against law, perverse

SHRI JASWANT SINGH ,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -4(3), JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 218/ASR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 144Section 147Section 249(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condoning the delay, ought to have adjudicated the issues of law and facts raised in its appeal by the assessee. 5. That ld.CIT(A)/NFAC was not justified in impliedly confirming the addition pf Rs.33,59,502/- as made by the Id.AO by way of an ex-parte order. 6. That the order under appeal is wholly against law, perverse

SHRI JASWANT SINGH ,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -4, PHAGWARA

In the result, the appeal of assessee in ITA No

ITA 219/ASR/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar30 Aug 2023AY 2010-11

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

Section 144Section 147Section 249(2)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condoning the delay, ought to have adjudicated the issues of law and facts raised in its appeal by the assessee. 5. That ld.CIT(A)/NFAC was not justified in impliedly confirming the addition pf Rs.33,59,502/- as made by the Id.AO by way of an ex-parte order. 6. That the order under appeal is wholly against law, perverse