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(4)(a)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai381Chennai194Kolkata184Delhi156Bangalore143Chandigarh121Ahmedabad114Karnataka102Hyderabad82Jaipur79Raipur74Pune61Surat56Indore54Lucknow42Visakhapatnam38Panaji28Agra26Amritsar25Patna23Cuttack23Cochin15Rajkot14Nagpur14Guwahati12Jodhpur11Ranchi11Jabalpur9Allahabad8Calcutta7Dehradun6Varanasi6Telangana3Andhra Pradesh1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

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

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

delay is not intentional or willful and as such we condone the same and admit the appeals to be heard on merits. 4. The common issue that arises in all the three appeals are that the Ld. first appellate authority has dismissed the appeals without admitting the same for hearing on merits for non-payment of advance tax coupled with

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

Showing 1–20 of 25 · Page 1 of 2

9
Limitation/Time-bar7
Section 2496
Cash Deposit6

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

delay is not intentional or willful and as such we condone the same and admit the appeals to be heard on merits. 4. The common issue that arises in all the three appeals are that the Ld. first appellate authority has dismissed the appeals without admitting the same for hearing on merits for non-payment of advance tax coupled with

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

delay is not intentional or willful and as such we condone the same and admit the appeals to be heard on merits. 4. The common issue that arises in all the three appeals are that the Ld. first appellate authority has dismissed the appeals without admitting the same for hearing on merits for non-payment of advance tax coupled with

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

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

249 of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A).” The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the subject appeals even in the 2nd 4. round by rejecting the appellant’s condonation petitions whereby he has noted that the assessee has failed to satisfactory explain the delay observing as under: Punjab State Warehousing Corp. v. ITO “3.4 As per letter 26.06.2014 issued

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

249 of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A).” The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the subject appeals even in the 2nd 4. round by rejecting the appellant’s condonation petitions whereby he has noted that the assessee has failed to satisfactory explain the delay observing as under: Punjab State Warehousing Corp. v. ITO “3.4 As per letter 26.06.2014 issued

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

249 of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A).” The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the subject appeals even in the 2nd 4. round by rejecting the appellant’s condonation petitions whereby he has noted that the assessee has failed to satisfactory explain the delay observing as under: Punjab State Warehousing Corp. v. ITO “3.4 As per letter 26.06.2014 issued

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

delay, we condone the same and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 3. The assessee has taken six grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 and his grievance is mainly due to the fact that the ld. First appellate authority has rejected the appeal without adjudicating on the ground contained in the memorandum of appeal, by refusing

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

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

4. The ld. DR has no objection if the delay is condoned. 5. Considering the medical issues stated by the assessee and also considering that no notice of hearing has been issued in the e-mail id provided in Form No. 35, we condone the delay, being not intentional or willful, on the part of the assessee and we admit

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

delay in filing the appeals before Ld. CIT(A) , has 4 I.T.A. Nos. 39 & 40/Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 not been condoned which according to the assessee is covered by extension under Covid period. 5. We find that in the instant case both the appeals have been dismissed as per provisions of section 249

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

delay in filing the appeals before Ld. CIT(A) , has 4 I.T.A. Nos. 39 & 40/Asr/2025 Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 not been condoned which according to the assessee is covered by extension under Covid period. 5. We find that in the instant case both the appeals have been dismissed as per provisions of section 249

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

4 I.T.A. Nos. 597& 598/Asr/2024 & Ors. Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 3.11 Considering the above discussion and facts, appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as not maintainable. In effect, the appeal is dismissed.” 7. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in Form No. 36. The assessee has taken seven grounds

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

4 I.T.A. Nos. 597& 598/Asr/2024 & Ors. Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 3.11 Considering the above discussion and facts, appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as not maintainable. In effect, the appeal is dismissed.” 7. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in Form No. 36. The assessee has taken seven grounds

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

4 I.T.A. Nos. 597& 598/Asr/2024 & Ors. Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 3.11 Considering the above discussion and facts, appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as not maintainable. In effect, the appeal is dismissed.” 7. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in Form No. 36. The assessee has taken seven grounds

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

4 I.T.A. Nos. 597& 598/Asr/2024 & Ors. Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 3.11 Considering the above discussion and facts, appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as not maintainable. In effect, the appeal is dismissed.” 7. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in Form No. 36. The assessee has taken seven grounds

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

4 I.T.A. Nos. 597& 598/Asr/2024 & Ors. Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2017-18 3.11 Considering the above discussion and facts, appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed as not maintainable. In effect, the appeal is dismissed.” 7. Now, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in Form No. 36. The assessee has taken seven grounds

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

section 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

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

4. The appeal filed before the ld. first appellate authority has been dismissed in limine without any adjudication on merits of the case, refusing to condone the delay in filing this appeal by 1275 days, where the appellate authority has refused to admit the appeal for adjudication on merits as per provisions of section 249

SANGAM TRADERS 60-GOLDEN AVENUE SAILI ROAD PATHANKOT,PATHANKOT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 PATHANKOT SAILI ROAD PATHANKOT, PATHANKOT

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

ITA 706/ASR/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar22 Jan 2026AY 2020-2021

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 144Section 249(3)Section 250Section 68

section 249(3) of the Act. 5. Before the Tribunal, the ld. AR of the assessee submitted that it was incumbent on the part of the ld. first appellate authority to provide an opportunity of hearing to the assessee to explain the reasons for the delay before refusing to admit the appeal, which has not been done in this case