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.

2,297 results for “condonation of delay”

Sorted by relevance

Chennai6,109 Mumbai5,261 Delhi4,760 Kolkata3,360 Pune3,131 Bangalore2,297 Hyderabad2,104 Ahmedabad1,875 Jaipur1,238 Patna1,040 Cochin979 Chandigarh884 Cuttack788 Visakhapatnam721 Nagpur720 Surat710 Indore597 Amritsar541 Lucknow501 Raipur456 Karnataka391 Rajkot364 Agra342 Panaji280 Calcutta258 Guwahati182 Dehradun167 Jodhpur146 Ranchi107 Jabalpur104 Allahabad86 SC79 Telangana77 Varanasi44 Kerala32 Andhra Pradesh21 Orissa14 Punjab & Haryana12 Rajasthan11 Himachal Pradesh6 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2 R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1 A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1 Uttarakhand1 DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1 VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1 Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income52 Condonation of Delay50 Section 25046 Section 143(1)38 Disallowance38 Section 143(3)31 Deduction30 Limitation/Time-bar27 Section 69A

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 704/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned simply because the assessee

Showing 1–20 of 2,297 · Page 1 of 115

...

26

Section 80P(2)(a)25

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 703/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned simply because the assessee

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 702/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned simply because the assessee

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 700/BANG/2024[2013-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Jun 2024AY 2013-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

For Appellant: Shri Ravishankar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R

Section 147Section 20Section 202Section 249(3)Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned simply because the assessee

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

ITA 425/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Revenue by : Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

condonation of delay application for seeking condonation for delay in filing the appeals. e. It is submitted that immediately after

M/S. SJS ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 972/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore27 Jun 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year:2017-18

For Appellant: Sri Rony Anthony, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 234B

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned simply because the assessee

M/S. S J S ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 327/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Rony Anthony, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Guru Kumar S., D.R

Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 250

delay, one should be very cautious while condoning the delay. The delay of 2491 cannot be condoned simply because the assessee

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

ITA 423/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Revenue byFor Respondent: Date of Hearing

Section 132Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 246ASection 271(1)(c)Section 274

condonation of delay application for seeking condonation for delay in filing the appeals. e. It is submitted that immediately after

M/S. RMZ HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 954/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 234Section 255Section 255(3)Section 36

condone the delay. Therefore we find no merit in the application for condonation of delay. Accordingly, we are of the considered

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

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

ITA 280/BANG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

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

ITA 283/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

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

ITA 282/BANG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

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

ITA 281/BANG/2024[2012-23]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 May 2024AY 2012-23

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri D.K. Mishra, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 68

condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

SHRI. MARATE VENKATESHKUMAR ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(6), HUBLI

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

ITA 819/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri B. Venugopal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department

Section 250Section 69A

condoning the delay on technicalities- If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

SRI. SUHAS SURESH SHET,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, WARD-2(1), BENGALURU

In the result, these two assessee’s appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 608/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

SRI. SUHAS SURESH SHET,BENGALURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, WARD-2(1), BENGALURU

In the result, these two assessee’s appeals are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 607/BANG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore04 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Shankar, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Priyadarshini Basaganni, Addl.CIT

Section 143(3)Section 271Section 271(1)(c)Section 271F

condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

PRATHAP SEETHARAMA REDDY ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(3)(1), BANGALAORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 1691/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Sri H. Guruswamy, A.RFor Respondent: Sri V. Parithivel, D.R

condoning the delay on technicalities. If the delay is not condoned, it would amount to legalising an illegal order which

KARLE INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 39/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Mar 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Lunkar, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., Addl.CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)

condonation of delay itself is sufficient for condoning the delay of 508 days. 17. In case the delay is not condoned

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

ITA 420/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Respondent: Shri Narendra Sharma

Section 132Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

condone the delay in filing the appeals. The Ld.AR has pleaded before us that, the Tribunal may condone the delay

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

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

ITA 428/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Respondent: Shri Narendra Sharma

Section 132Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 154Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

condone the delay in filing the appeals. The Ld.AR has pleaded before us that, the Tribunal may condone the delay