Search: condonation of delay | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

171 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 143clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai2,256 Chennai1,595 Delhi1,525 Kolkata1,468 Bangalore738 Hyderabad620 Ahmedabad617 Pune616 Jaipur420 Surat344 Indore309 Chandigarh303 Lucknow200 Visakhapatnam200 Nagpur197 Rajkot189 Cochin188 Amritsar171 Karnataka169 Raipur163 Patna145 Cuttack97 Panaji92 Calcutta82 Agra79 Jodhpur39 Guwahati38 Dehradun36 Allahabad35 Jabalpur31 Varanasi22 SC15 Telangana13 Ranchi12 Himachal Pradesh4 Andhra Pradesh4 Orissa3 Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Addition to Income84 Section 14473 Section 250(6)61 Disallowance50 Section 143(3)48 Natural Justice46 Section 26345 Section 139(1)43 Condonation of Delay

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

section 143(2) within time limit prescribed, said order was liable to be set aside - Revenue filed an application for condonation of delay

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

Showing 1–20 of 171 · Page 1 of 9

...

41

Section 143(1)38

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 u/s 143

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

143(1) of the assessee. The assessee submitted the condonation of delay with an affidavit and also the ld. counsel respectfully relied on the order of Hon’ble Apex Court which are reproduced as below: Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) v. ACIT [2019] 112 taxmann.com 134 (SC): I.T.A. No.57/Asr/2021 7 Assessment Year

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

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

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

condoned by the CBDT on this Circular. 4. The ld. AR relied on the section 12A(1)(b) and he mentioned that it is pertinent to mention that section 12A(1)(b) as applicable for assessment year 2018- 19 requires the assessee to get the accounts audited by an accountant as defined under section (2) of section 288 and file

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 in the Bank account. Accordingly, in view of provisions contained in clause (a) of Explanation 2 below sub section (1) of section

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

delay of 967 days in filing these appeals is hereby condoned and appeals are admitted to be heard on merits. 5. The ld. Pr. CIT has observed that during the course of assessment proceedings in the case of M/s Tirath Ram Badri Nath, Abohar in respect of AY 2008-09, AO has noted that the appellant Sh. Manjit Krishan Malhotra

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

delay of 967 days in filing these appeals is hereby condoned and appeals are admitted to be heard on merits. 5. The ld. Pr. CIT has observed that during the course of assessment proceedings in the case of M/s Tirath Ram Badri Nath, Abohar in respect of AY 2008-09, AO has noted that the appellant Sh. Manjit Krishan Malhotra

GURPREET SINGH KHURANA,JALANDHAR vs. ITO WARD 1(5), JALANDHAR

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

ITA 539/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 143(3)Section 263

143(3). Condonation of delay; 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 10 days in filing the appeal before us. The ld. AR has submitted an application for condonation of delay which is reproduced as below: I.T.A. No. 539/Asr/2024 2 Assessment Year: 2017-18 That the appeal filed before the Hon'ble Bench

SHRI NITIN SEHGAL,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-3, JALANDHAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 7/ASR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar15 May 2023AY 2017-18

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

Section 143(3)Section 5

143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) gravelly erred in sustaining addition of Rs. 6,50,000/- in respect of cash seized from the assessee. 3.1 That while sustaining the addition, the Ld. CIT(A) did not appreciate the source of amounts and the cash flow chart filed during the assessment proceedings

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

AMARJOT SINGH,VILLAGE BABEHALI DISTT GURDASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER GURDASPUR, GURDASPUR

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 598/ASR/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

delay is condoned. 3. Brief facts of this case are that the assessee is engaged in agricultural activity and has filed his regular return declaring an income of Rs. 2.31 lakhs from other source and agricultural income of Rs. 22.70 lakhs, which has been assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act 61. 4. Subsequently, on information from investigation wing

AMARJOT SINGH,GURDASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD GURDASPUR, GURDASPUR

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 597/ASR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

delay is condoned. 3. Brief facts of this case are that the assessee is engaged in agricultural activity and has filed his regular return declaring an income of Rs. 2.31 lakhs from other source and agricultural income of Rs. 22.70 lakhs, which has been assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act 61. 4. Subsequently, on information from investigation wing

AMARJOT SINGH VILLAGE BABEHALI DISTT GURDASPUR,GURDASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD GURDASPUR, GURDASPUR

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 102/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

delay is condoned. 3. Brief facts of this case are that the assessee is engaged in agricultural activity and has filed his regular return declaring an income of Rs. 2.31 lakhs from other source and agricultural income of Rs. 22.70 lakhs, which has been assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act 61. 4. Subsequently, on information from investigation wing

AMARJOT SINGH VILLAGE BABEHALI DISTT GURDASPUR,GURDASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD GURDASPUR, GURDASPUR

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 101/ASR/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

delay is condoned. 3. Brief facts of this case are that the assessee is engaged in agricultural activity and has filed his regular return declaring an income of Rs. 2.31 lakhs from other source and agricultural income of Rs. 22.70 lakhs, which has been assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act 61. 4. Subsequently, on information from investigation wing

AMARJOT SINGH VILLAGE BABEHALI DISTT GURDASPUR,GURDASPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD GURDASPUR G T ROAD GURDASPUR, GURDASPUR

In the result, all the five appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 103/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Oct 2025AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69

delay is condoned. 3. Brief facts of this case are that the assessee is engaged in agricultural activity and has filed his regular return declaring an income of Rs. 2.31 lakhs from other source and agricultural income of Rs. 22.70 lakhs, which has been assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act 61. 4. Subsequently, on information from investigation wing

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