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”+ Section 249(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai375Chennai189Kolkata182Ahmedabad159Delhi157Bangalore145Chandigarh124Hyderabad118Jaipur104Karnataka102Surat75Raipur74Pune64Indore54Lucknow42Visakhapatnam39Cochin37Amritsar29Agra28Panaji28Patna23Cuttack22Rajkot15Guwahati14Nagpur14Jodhpur13Ranchi13Jabalpur9Allahabad8Calcutta8Varanasi6Dehradun6Telangana3Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 25027Condonation of Delay25Section 249(4)(b)19Section 200A(1)16Section 234E16Section 249(3)14Section 14413Addition to Income13Section 148

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

2. That the Assessing Officer has legally erred in law and facts for treating the assessee as a person liable to deduct tax at source under section 194C of Income Tax Act, 1961, provisions of section 194C are not applicable on the facts of our case. 3. That the appellant seeks the permission to alter, amend or delete

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

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

12
Section 14711
Limitation/Time-bar11
TDS8

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

2. That the Assessing Officer has legally erred in law and facts for treating the assessee as a person liable to deduct tax at source under section 194C of Income Tax Act, 1961, provisions of section 194C are not applicable on the facts of our case. 3. That the appellant seeks the permission to alter, amend or delete

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

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

2. That the Assessing Officer has legally erred in law and facts for treating the assessee as a person liable to deduct tax at source under section 194C of Income Tax Act, 1961, provisions of section 194C are not applicable on the facts of our case. 3. That the appellant seeks the permission to alter, amend or delete

BHAGAT PARKASH KAMAL SHARMA,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD -1 (1), JAMMU

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

ITA 184/ASR/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

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

Section 127Section 127(2)Section 144Section 249(2)Section 250Section 68

condonation of the delay in filing of the appeal, the present appeal is dismissed as not maintainable. Thus, the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as no maintainable.” 6. The ld. CIT(A) only on point of limitation rejected the appeal for absence of the ‘sufficient cause’for delay & contravening the provision of section 249(2

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

2) in response to return submitted u/s 148, even though, we find that the return has been filed by the assessee after receipt of the draft assessment order and the same has been filed after 11 (eleven) months from the date of service of notice u/s 148. 8. Moreover, on merits he submitted that the credit entries relating to bank

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

2) in response to return submitted u/s 148, even though, we find that the return has been filed by the assessee after receipt of the draft assessment order and the same has been filed after 11 (eleven) months from the date of service of notice u/s 148. 8. Moreover, on merits he submitted that the credit entries relating to bank

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

2) in response to return submitted u/s 148, even though, we find that the return has been filed by the assessee after receipt of the draft assessment order and the same has been filed after 11 (eleven) months from the date of service of notice u/s 148. 8. Moreover, on merits he submitted that the credit entries relating to bank

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

2) in response to return submitted u/s 148, even though, we find that the return has been filed by the assessee after receipt of the draft assessment order and the same has been filed after 11 (eleven) months from the date of service of notice u/s 148. 8. Moreover, on merits he submitted that the credit entries relating to bank

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

2) in response to return submitted u/s 148, even though, we find that the return has been filed by the assessee after receipt of the draft assessment order and the same has been filed after 11 (eleven) months from the date of service of notice u/s 148. 8. Moreover, on merits he submitted that the credit entries relating to bank

TRANSWORLD MUSLIM UNIVERSITY DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE,BARBAR SHAH SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-( EXEMPTIONS), JAMMU

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

ITA 40/ASR/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 147Section 249(3)Section 250

2. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that both the appeals are belated by 277 (two hundred seventy seven) days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay in respect of both the years stating that the e-mail address mentioned in Form No. 35 saleem.tmu@gmail.com, belongs to one of the employees

TRANSWORLD MUSLIM UNIVERSITY DIAGNOSTIC CENTRE,BARBAR SHAH SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-( EXEMPTIONS), JAMMU

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

ITA 39/ASR/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar17 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 147Section 249(3)Section 250

2. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that both the appeals are belated by 277 (two hundred seventy seven) days. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay in respect of both the years stating that the e-mail address mentioned in Form No. 35 saleem.tmu@gmail.com, belongs to one of the employees

ABDUL HAMID NACHAR,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, RAJBAGH SRINAGAR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 166/ASR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs
Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

2. Since identical facts and common grounds are involved in all the years, all the appeals are taken together for disposal. 3. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that all the three appeals are filed belatedly, by 50 (fifty) days, by 52 (fifty two) days and by 53(fifty three) days, respectively. The assessee has filed

ABDUL HAMID NACHAR,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, RAJBAGH SRINAGAR

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 158/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs
Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

2. Since identical facts and common grounds are involved in all the years, all the appeals are taken together for disposal. 3. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that all the three appeals are filed belatedly, by 50 (fifty) days, by 52 (fifty two) days and by 53(fifty three) days, respectively. The assessee has filed

ABDUL HAMID NACHAR,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, RAJBAGH

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the assessees are allowed for

ITA 161/ASR/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar18 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Tasir Ul Islam & Sh. Zubair Khan, Advs
Section 147Section 249Section 249(4)(b)Section 250

2. Since identical facts and common grounds are involved in all the years, all the appeals are taken together for disposal. 3. Condonation of delay: It is pointed out by the registry that all the three appeals are filed belatedly, by 50 (fifty) days, by 52 (fifty two) days and by 53(fifty three) days, respectively. The assessee has filed

SANT SOLIDER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 29/ASR/2021[2014-15.Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(Appeals) has erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal dismissing the appeal as unadmitted. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in not exercising the discretion vested upon him by virtue of section 249

SANT SOLDIER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CPC-TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 26/ASR/2021[2013-14,Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(Appeals) has erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal dismissing the appeal as unadmitted. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in not exercising the discretion vested upon him by virtue of section 249

SANT SOLDIER ENGINEERS AND CONTRCTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 28/ASR/2021[2013-14.Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(Appeals) has erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal dismissing the appeal as unadmitted. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in not exercising the discretion vested upon him by virtue of section 249

SANT SOLIDER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LIMITED,JALANDHAR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC-TDS, GHAZIBAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee through in ITA Nos

ITA 30/ASR/2021[2014-15,Q-4]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar03 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Manish Borad

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234ESection 249Section 250

2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(Appeals) has erred in not condoning the delay in filing of appeal dismissing the appeal as unadmitted. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the CIT(A) has erred in not exercising the discretion vested upon him by virtue of section 249

PEPSU ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION,KAPURTHALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), JALANDHAR, JALANDHAR

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

ITA 375/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A
Section 206CSection 206C(7)Section 249(2)Section 250

249(2) of the Act, 61. 3. Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee is a State Government Undertaking engaged in Transport Activities and are receiving ADPA fees, license fees and parking fees from two wheelers and other vehicles. On inspection of records it has been ascertained by the Income Tax Officer, TDS, Jalandhar, that the assessee PEPSU

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 period and had a total deposit of Rs.1