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.

71 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 282clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai122Karnataka122Mumbai118Jaipur77Delhi73Amritsar71Kolkata67Pune52Bangalore46Panaji40Chandigarh31Hyderabad26Ahmedabad23Surat16Cochin14Indore13Rajkot11Lucknow11Raipur8Nagpur7Varanasi7Agra6Visakhapatnam6Cuttack5Jodhpur4Calcutta3Patna2SC2Allahabad2Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1Guwahati1

Key Topics

Section 14486Addition to Income56Section 250(6)39Natural Justice37Disallowance35Section 25034Depreciation33Condonation of Delay30Section 147

SHRI GHULAM NABI DAND ,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, UDHAMPUR

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

ITA 88/ASR/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar16 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: None (Written submission)
Section 147Section 250Section 69A

condone the delay of 180 Days, and dismiss this appeal of the appellant as barred by limitation. In view of the above discussion appeal is rendered as inadmissible.” 7. Now, the assessee is before the Tribunal on various grounds contained in the memorandum of appeal and one of the main grievance of the assessee is that he has not been

HEMOPHILLA SOCIETY OF KASHMIR,SRINAGAR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, this appeal against the rejection for registration u/s 80G(5), is also

Showing 1–20 of 71 · Page 1 of 4

16
Section 14816
Section 28215
Cash Deposit15
ITA 209/ASR/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C. A
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be decided on merits. 3. Grounds of appeal taken by the assesseee in Form No. 36 are as follows: “1. The Ld. CIT (E) has erred in rejecting the registration u/s 12AB of the Income Tax Act in an arbitrary manner. 2. The Ld. CIT (E) has erred in not giving

SHRI TAJINDER KUMAR,BATALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, BATALA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 289/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 147Section 250(6)

section 282 of the act 61 (r.w.r. 127 of I T Rules 62). 12. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. I.T.A. No. 290/ASR / 2024 for Asst Year: 2013-14 Penalty matter u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act 61; 13. This appeal is time barred by eighteen days. Consideration the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay

SHRI TAJINDER KUMAR,BATALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, BATALA

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 290/ASR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 147Section 250(6)

section 282 of the act 61 (r.w.r. 127 of I T Rules 62). 12. The appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. I.T.A. No. 290/ASR / 2024 for Asst Year: 2013-14 Penalty matter u/s 271(1) (c) of the Act 61; 13. This appeal is time barred by eighteen days. Consideration the reasons stated in the application for condonation of delay

KHURSHID AHMAD DAR,JAMMU AND KASHMIR, INDIA vs. ITO WARD, UDHAMPUR, UDHAMPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 236/ASR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar10 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lalmeena, Hon'Ble & Shri Udayan Das Gupta, Hon'Blekhurshid Ahmad Dar Vs. Ito, Ward, Nully Poshwari Turkawangam, Udhampur Shopia, 192305, Jammu & Kashmir, India.Pin 192305. Pan No. Awmpd5664K Assessee By Shri Rohit Kapoor, Adv. & Shri V.S. Aggarwal, Itp. Revenue By Mrs. Roshanta Kumari Meena, Cit Dr. Date Of Hearing 23.09.2025. Date Of Pronouncement To. [1 .2025. Order Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, A.M.:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 151(1)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

condone the delay of 171 days and admit the appeal on merits. 4 4. The assessee has raised additional legal grounds which were also raised in main grounds. One of the legal issue raised by the assessee is that the assessment framed under section 147 is bad in law as the notice under section 148 was issued on 13.04.2021 without

SHARAN FOUNDATION,MOGA, PUNJAB vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 254/ASR/2024[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Amritsar13 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Nikhil Goyal, Adv., &
Section 282Section 80Section 80G(5)(iii)

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted to be heard on merits. 3. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: “1. Whether order passed by ld. CIT(E) in Form No. 10AD is liable to be set aside on Principle of Natural Justice? 2. Whether mere uploading of notice

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

condone the delay of the assessee in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority being 91(ninty one days) for assessment year 2013-14 and 201 ( two hundred and one days ) for the assessment year 2014-15 and we remand both the appeals to the files of the ld. first appellate authority for admitting the appeals and adjudicating

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

condone the delay of the assessee in filing the appeals before the first appellate authority being 91(ninty one days) for assessment year 2013-14 and 201 ( two hundred and one days ) for the assessment year 2014-15 and we remand both the appeals to the files of the ld. first appellate authority for admitting the appeals and adjudicating

SHOWKAT SHAFI, S.O. MOHAMMAD YATOO, YATOO MANZIL NAGAM CHADOORA BUDGAM,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(3), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 284/ASR/2024[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 Apr 2025AY 2012-2013

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Kushal Chopra, C. A
Section 144Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in passing the order ex-parte and has erred in confirming the order of Assessing Officer without giving any decisions on the merits

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

condone the delay of two months which has occurred before the ld. first appellate authority and also considering the facts that the original assessment order has been passed ex-parte without any proper representation, we are of the opinion that the examination of source of cash deposits in bank account and explanation of credit card 5 I.T.A. No. 607/Asr/2024 Assessment

LAKHVIR SINGH 810, VPO MALLAH TEHSIL JAGRAON DISTRICT LUDHIANA,PUNJAB vs. THE ASSESSMENT UNIT NFAC DELHI JAO INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, MOGA, PUNJAB

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

ITA 541/ASR/2024[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar29 May 2025AY 2015-2016

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

For Appellant: Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 250Section 69A

condone and the ld. CIT(A) may please be directed to admit the appeal for hearing on merits. In support of his contention, the assessee has placed reliance on a number of judicial decisions in the case of “Esha Bhattacharya” in Civil Appeal No. 8183-8184 of 2013 (SC), the Hon’ble Tribunal Amritsar in the case of Gurfateh Filsm

IRFAN SHAH,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 381/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Udayan Dasgupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Sh. Kundan Pandey for Sh. Vipul Arora C.A
Section 115BSection 144Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: “1. That the Worthy Commissioner of Income Tax ( Appeals) has, in view of the facts and circumstance of the case, grossly erred in confirming addition of Rs.3240500 on account of cash deposited during demonetization

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

FAQIR CHAND PROP FAQIR CHAND & SONS R S PURA JAMMU,JAMMU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(1) JAMMU AAYKAR BHAWAN RAIL HEAD COMPLEX PANAMA CHOWK JAMMU, JAMMU

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

ITA 91/ASR/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-2018

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

For Appellant: Sh. P. N. Arora, Adv
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 4. The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 and the first three grounds relates to the issue that proper opportunity of hearing has not been allowed by the ld. first appellate authority and there was no proper service of notice and as such

M/S. NATRANG REGD ,JAMMU vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ( EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 404/ASR/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar24 Apr 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Sh. Udayan Das Gupta & Sh. Krinwant Sahay

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 282

section 282 of the Act, the order of the ld. CIT(E) has remained unserved and as such he prays for condoning the delay

SAINT BABA FATEH SINGH TRUST,BATHINDA vs. EXEMPTION WARD, AMRITSAR

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

ITA 394/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Vipul Arora, C. A
Section 10Section 10(23)(c)Section 143(3)Section 250

condone the delay, taking into consideration the medical certificate of Fortis Hospital enclosed as evidence. 4. The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal in Form No. 36 and his main contention is that the ld. first appellate authority has disposed of the appeal without considering his application for an adjournment of hearing and thereafter without considering the written submissions

SHRI ABDUL AHAD WANI,SRINAGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 362/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C. A
Section 144Section 250Section 282

condone the delay being not intentional or willful on the part of the assessee and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal and main objection of the assessee is that the order has been passed by the ld. first appellate authority without allowing proper opportunity of hearing and without adjudicating

SHRI MOHAMMAD AMIN BHAT,ANANTNAG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, SRINAGAR

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

ITA 378/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar26 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Sh. Mohd. Iqbal Untoo, C. A
Section 144Section 250Section 282

condone the delay being not intentional or willful on the part of the assessee and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The assessee has taken five grounds of appeal and main objection of the assessee is that the order has been passed by the ld. first appellate authority without allowing proper opportunity of hearing and without adjudicating

HUMAIRA IFTIKHAR,JAWAHAR NAGAR SRINGAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), SRINAGAR

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

ITA 667/ASR/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Sh. Tanveer Altaf Qadri, C.A
Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)

condone the delay in absence of any intentional neglect on the part of the assessee and we admit the appeal for hearing on merits. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: 3 I.T.A. No. 667/Asr/2024 Humaira Iftikhar v. ITO “1. The Ld. A.O. has treated the cash deposits to the tune

SHRI BHUSAN KUMAR,JALANDHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD- 3 (1) , JALANDHAR

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

ITA 298/ASR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 May 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: None
Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 271ASection 282Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal to be heard on merits. 5. The grounds of appeal taken by the assessee in form 36 are as follows: “1. The worthy Income Tax Officer erred in completing the assessment by making an addition u/s 69A of Rs.993500/- against the facts and circumstances of the case. 3 I.T.A. No. 298/Asr/2024 Bhushan Kumar