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.

25 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 249(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai228Chennai140Kolkata127Chandigarh118Delhi105Bangalore103Ahmedabad100Raipur71Hyderabad70Jaipur69Surat57Pune56Indore53Visakhapatnam36Lucknow35Panaji28Agra26Amritsar25Patna23Cuttack23Nagpur14Rajkot14Guwahati12Ranchi11Jodhpur11Jabalpur9Allahabad6Cochin5Dehradun3SC2Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 25023Condonation of Delay21Section 249(4)(b)19Section 249(3)14Section 14413Addition to Income13Section 14812Section 14711Section 142(1)

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

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

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2

9
Limitation/Time-bar7
Section 2496
Cash Deposit6

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

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

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 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 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, 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 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,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 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

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

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

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

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

SNATAN DHARM SABHA,MUKERIAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD( EXEMPTIONS), JALANDHAR

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

ITA 290/ASR/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 11Section 12Section 143(1)Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250

249(2). Thus, this clearly is a case of laches and is directly the result of inaction of the part of the appellant. The reason given for delay is not persuasive enough to permit its condonation. In light of the foregoing, it is held that the appellant has no "sufficient cause in terms of section

SHRI SAJID BASHIR KHAN,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 302/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar14 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Sh. Udayan Dasgupta(Hybrid Hearing) I.T.A. No. 302/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sajid Bashir Khan, Iqbalabad Vs. Ito, Ward (1), Bemina Srinagar, Jammu & Srinagar. Kashmir. [Pan:-Bxxpk6247E] (Respondent) (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Bashir Ahmad Lone Ca Respondent By Sh. Charan Dass, Sr. Dr

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 210Section 249(4)(b)Section 250Section 282Section 69A

2 Assessment Year: 2017-18 2.1 In course of hearing the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that the appeal has been dispatched by post on 17th May, 2024 from Srinagar J & K which has reached the office of the tribunal on 20th May 2024 resulting in delay of 1 day and he asked for condonation of the same. Considering

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

249(3) of the Act. 6. Now, before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that in course of first appellate proceedings, adjournments were filed, requesting for adjournment for hearing which the ld. CIT(A) has refused to grant and the appeal has been dismissed refusing to condone the delay by 128 days. He submitted that the assessment

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