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.

21 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 133(6)clear

Sorted by relevance

Kolkata283Mumbai281Delhi218Chennai187Bangalore129Karnataka122Jaipur121Ahmedabad108Hyderabad82Surat64Pune55Calcutta42Chandigarh38Lucknow35Cochin34Visakhapatnam30Patna23Raipur21Amritsar21Indore20Cuttack19Rajkot18Nagpur10Varanasi8Allahabad7Guwahati7SC5Agra4Panaji4Telangana3Ranchi2Rajasthan2Dehradun2Orissa2Andhra Pradesh1Jodhpur1

Key Topics

Section 12A24Section 25017Condonation of Delay16Addition to Income10Section 142(1)8Limitation/Time-bar8Section 69A7Section 143(3)6Section 133(6)

BAHADUR KE TEXTILES & KNITWEAR ASSOCIATION,LUDHIANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 86/ASR/2020[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Amlendu Nath Misra, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

6 Bahadur Ke Textiles & Knitwear Association v. CIT 9. The Ld. Counsel also relied upon the decision of Coordinate Bench in case of M/s Gurfateh Films and Sippy Grewal Productions P Ltd. vs Pr. CIT (Central), Ludhiana in ITA No. 92/Asr/2020 dated 23.12.2021 where the Bench has condoned the delay of 665 days wherein the Appellant has proved its bonafide

BAHUDER KE TEXTILES AND KNITWEARS ASSOCIATION,LUDHIANA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTION ) , CHANDIGARH

Showing 1–20 of 21 · Page 1 of 2

6
Section 1446
Section 366
TDS6

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

ITA 501/ASR/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar11 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Amlendu Nath Misra, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 2(15)Section 25

6 Bahadur Ke Textiles & Knitwear Association v. CIT 9. The Ld. Counsel also relied upon the decision of Coordinate Bench in case of M/s Gurfateh Films and Sippy Grewal Productions P Ltd. vs Pr. CIT (Central), Ludhiana in ITA No. 92/Asr/2020 dated 23.12.2021 where the Bench has condoned the delay of 665 days wherein the Appellant has proved its bonafide

RANJANA DEVI,MAUR MANDI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1(1), BATHINDA

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

ITA 410/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar20 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Dipak P. Ripote & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Physical Hearing) I.T.A. No. 410/Asr/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Ranjana Devi, C/O Jishu Trading Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Co. Maur Mandi, Punjab. Bathinda. [Pan:-Alzpd4607L] (Appellant) (Respondent) None. Appellant By Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr.

Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 263Section 69A

condoned and the appeal admitted for hearing on merits. Substantial justice is more important than the procedural delay. 3. At the outset, during the course of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee before the Bench. 4. The Assessee raised the following grounds of appeal: “1. That order passed u/s 250 of the Income

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

133 to 137/Asr/2021 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2020-21 Executive Engineer Vs. Dy. CIT, CPC (TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals

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

133 to 137/Asr/2021 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2020-21 Executive Engineer Vs. Dy. CIT, CPC (TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals

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

133 to 137/Asr/2021 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2020-21 Executive Engineer Vs. Dy. CIT, CPC (TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals

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

133 to 137/Asr/2021 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2020-21 Executive Engineer Vs. Dy. CIT, CPC (TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals

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

133 to 137/Asr/2021 Assessment Years: 2016-17 to 2020-21 Executive Engineer Vs. Dy. CIT, CPC (TDS) Floriculture, Radio Colony Srinagar Rajbagh Srinagar, 190008, Jammu & Kashmir [TAN: AMRE 10520G] (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, CA Respondent by: Ms. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 26.09.2022 Date of Pronouncement: 10.10.2022 ORDER Per Bench: These bunch of appeals

M/S. GOLDEN TULIP HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 264/ASR/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2023AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, CA &
Section 150Section 250(6)Section 69A

delay is condoned, and appeal is admitted for hearing on merits of the case. 6. Briefly the facts are that the assesee the assessee was engaged in construction activity. The AO stated that that the payments which are received through banking channel only relates to it and the payments made in cash by Sh. Abdul Majeed Sheikh to various parties

M/S. GOLDEN TULIP HOSPITALITY PRIVATE LIMITED ,SRINAGAR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE, SRINAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 265/ASR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2023AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Rohit Kapoor, CA &
Section 150Section 250(6)Section 69A

delay is condoned, and appeal is admitted for hearing on merits of the case. 6. Briefly the facts are that the assesee the assessee was engaged in construction activity. The AO stated that that the payments which are received through banking channel only relates to it and the payments made in cash by Sh. Abdul Majeed Sheikh to various parties

SH. JASPAL SINGH S/O SH. SWARAN SINGH,AMRITSAR. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,, AMRITSAR.

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 445/ASR/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar08 May 2019AY 2004-05

Bench: Sh. Sanjay Arorai.T.A. No. 445/Asr/2016 Assessment Year: 2004-05

For Appellant: Sh. Padam Bahl (C.A.)For Respondent: Sh. Charan Dass (D.R.)
Section 144Section 154

condonation application dated 11.10.2016 explains the delay as on account of the assessee having moved an application u/s. 154 before the ld. CIT(A) immediately on the receipt of the impugned order on 04.04.2016, praying that the addition could not be at Rs.14.20 2 Jaspal Singh v. ITO lacs, as confirmed, as the same, representing the price of the shop

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

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

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

NAZIR AHMAD BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. ITO, ANANTNAG

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

ITA 274/ASR/2025[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vaseem Ahmad, C. A
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 251(2)

condone the delay 3 I.T.A. Nos. 273 & 274Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 and admit both the appeals to be heard on merits. (Even though no supporting medical documents has been filed by the counsel, we accept his verbal statement declared in court, at face value). 5. Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee is a retired

NAZIR AHMAD BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. ITO, ANANTNAG

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

ITA 273/ASR/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar19 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vaseem Ahmad, C. A
Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 251(2)

condone the delay 3 I.T.A. Nos. 273 & 274Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 and admit both the appeals to be heard on merits. (Even though no supporting medical documents has been filed by the counsel, we accept his verbal statement declared in court, at face value). 5. Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee is a retired

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, SRINAGAR vs. M/S TRUMBO CEMENT INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED, SRINAGAR

In the result, the Ground no-1 of the Revenue for ITA No

ITA 124/ASR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2015-16

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

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(1)(va)Section 250Section 36Section 43BSection 68

condoned. I.T.A. No.123/Asr/2020 The revenue has taken the following grounds: “1. The Ld. CIT (A) Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,59,123/-made by the A.O on a/c of payments for provident fund dues^ beyond due date as provided u/s 36(l)(va). As the payments related to employees contribution towards EPF were deposited beyond

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, SRINAGAR vs. M/S TRUMBO CEMENT INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED , SRINAGAR

In the result, the Ground no-1 of the Revenue for ITA No

ITA 123/ASR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar12 May 2023AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 23(1)(va)Section 250Section 36Section 43BSection 68

condoned. I.T.A. No.123/Asr/2020 The revenue has taken the following grounds: “1. The Ld. CIT (A) Jammu has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,59,123/-made by the A.O on a/c of payments for provident fund dues^ beyond due date as provided u/s 36(l)(va). As the payments related to employees contribution towards EPF were deposited beyond

BALRAJ WINE,SHRI MUKTSAR SAHIB vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOE TAX CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA

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

ITA 10/ASR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Mar 2023AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir SehgalFor Respondent: Sh. Prashant Singh, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 272A

6). Therefore, the assessee has been provided a copy of the appellate order of CIT(A) through email dated 21.01.2023 to enable the appellant to file the appeal before the Tribunal with the self declaration of the partner. The ld. Addl. CIT-DR has no objection to the request of the counsel for condonation of delay on account of bonafide

SH.RAMESH KUMAR MAHAJAN,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), SRINAGAR

In the result, the appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 147/ASR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

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

Section 206CSection 250

delay of 02 days is condoned. 3. The assessee has taken the following grounds which are reproduced as below: “1) That the Ld. CIT (Appeals) is not justified in treating the Assessee as Assessee in default for non-collection of tax at source on sale of scrap. 2) That on the facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (Appeals