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.

27 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 12(1)(ac)clear

Sorted by relevance

Hyderabad146Mumbai114Karnataka109Pune106Chennai100Kolkata85Ahmedabad80Delhi68Chandigarh61Jaipur51Calcutta34Amritsar31Bangalore27Surat27Rajkot21Indore9SC9Patna5Panaji4Nagpur4Cochin4Agra3Rajasthan3Visakhapatnam3Orissa2Jabalpur2Guwahati2Raipur2Telangana2Lucknow2Jodhpur2Dehradun1Himachal Pradesh1Cuttack1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1Andhra Pradesh1Varanasi1

Key Topics

Section 12A20Addition to Income13Exemption12Section 43B10Section 80P8Limitation/Time-bar8Condonation of Delay8Natural Justice8Deduction

SHRI HINGULAMBIKA EDUCATION SOCIETY,GULBARGA vs. ITO (EXEMPTIONS), WARD-1, KALBURGI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1126/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Phalguna Kumar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Shahnawaz Ul Rahman, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

AC Provisional Registration is issued for 21- 22 to 23-24 three Asst years. Based on this only the Appellant has filed its Return of Income on 31.5.2021 for the Asst Year 2020-21, as the relevant due date was extended due to Covid-19. Thus here the Return is filed after applying and obtaining the provisional Registration. Thus

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2

7
Section 80P(2)(a)6
Section 12A(1)6
Section 2636

KARNATAKA CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,BENGALURU vs. DCIT-(EXEMPTIONS) CIRCLE-1, BANGALORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1267/BANG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 May 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessmentyear:2016-17

For Appellant: Sri N. Suresh, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, D.R
Section 250Section 253(5)

condoning the short delay of 41 days in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and admit the same for adjudication. 7. Now coming to the brief facts of the case are that the assessee Trust e-filed its return of income for the assessment year 2016-17 belatedly u/s 139(4) of the Act on 18.1.2018 declaring nil income after

SRI. CHANDRAKANT SHAMAPPA KONTHA,HUBLI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1) & TPS, HUBLI

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2396/BANG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 143Section 36Section 5

condoned and the appeal of the assesses are admitted. 8. The solitary issue in this appeal is that assessee is an individual assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2019 – 20 on 6 February 2020 at a total income of ₹ 24,483,310/– showing income from house property, income from business and income from other

SRI. CHANDRAKANT SHAMAPPA KONTHA,HUBLI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1 & TPS, HUBLI

In the result both the appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2397/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Keshav Dubey

Section 143Section 36Section 5

condoned and the appeal of the assesses are admitted. 8. The solitary issue in this appeal is that assessee is an individual assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2019 – 20 on 6 February 2020 at a total income of ₹ 24,483,310/– showing income from house property, income from business and income from other

MARINE DRISHTI AND COASTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 456/BANG/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri E. Shridhar, D.R
Section 12ASection 253Section 80G

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

MARINE DRISHTI AND COSTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 454/BANG/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri E. Shridhar, D.R
Section 12ASection 253Section 80G

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

MARINE DRISHTI AND COSTAL FOUNDATION ,GOA vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), BANGALORE, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 455/BANG/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 Jul 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri E. Shridhar, D.R
Section 12ASection 253Section 80G

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. Now the brief facts of the case are that the assessee “Marine Drishti Coastal Foundation” was incorporated on 24/05/2022 under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 as a non-profit organization to promote commerce, arts, science, sports, education, research, charity, protection of the environment, promote diverse cultural and heritage

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 109/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

condoning the delay. Thus, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Meeta Gutgutia has reached finality. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 42 of 115 22. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Murli Agro Products

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 107/BANG/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

condoning the delay. Thus, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Meeta Gutgutia has reached finality. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 42 of 115 22. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Murli Agro Products

M/S. TRISHUL BUILDTECH & INFRASTRUCTURES PVT. LTD.,,BENGALURU vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(2), BENGALURU

In the result, assessee’s appeals are partly allowed

ITA 108/BANG/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Nov 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.

For Appellant: Shri A. Shankar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, D.R
Section 250

condoning the delay. Thus, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Meeta Gutgutia has reached finality. ITA Nos.107 to 109/Bang/2022 M/s. Trishul Buildtech & Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore Page 42 of 115 22. The Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Murli Agro Products

M/S. YASHA PATTINA SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NI,RAICHUR vs. ITO, WARD-1, , RAICHUR

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

ITA 1177/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Channamalikarjuna Gowda, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Section 154Section 253(3)Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

Ac, the time limit to file appeal before this Tribunal is 60 days of the date on which order sought to be appealed served to the assessee or to the Principal CIT as the case may be. Thus, the normal time limit available is 60 days from the date of receipt of the order of the CIT(A). However

KANCHI PERIYAVA TRUST-MYSORE ,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), , BENGALURU

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

ITA 1319/BANG/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri V Chandrasekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nandini Das, CIT (DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)

1. The order of rejection for approval under section 80G of the Act passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [Exemptions], Bengaluru dated 23/03/2024, in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, requires to be quashed. 2. The learned Principal Commissioner

KANCHI PERIYAVA TRUST-MYSORE,BENGALURU vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(EXEMPTIONS), BENGALAURU

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

ITA 1320/BANG/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Jan 2025AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Shri V Chandrasekhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Nandini Das, CIT (DR)
Section 12ASection 12A(1)

1. The order of rejection for approval under section 80G of the Act passed by the learned Principal Commissioner of Income-tax [Exemptions], Bengaluru dated 23/03/2024, in so far as it is against the Appellant is opposed to law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the Appellant's case, requires to be quashed. 2. The learned Principal Commissioner

ANJAPPAR CHETTINAD AC RESTAURANT,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the both the appeals are allowed

ITA 452/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. V. Padmanaban, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

AC ITO, Vs. Restaurant - Bangalore, Ward – 1(2)(1), 100 Ft Road, Indira Nagar, BMTC Building, Bengaluru-560 038. Bengaluru. PAN : AAZFA 0846 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. V. Padmanaban, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 14.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2022 O R D E R ITA No.393Bang/2022 is an appeal

ANJAPPAR CHETTINAD AC RESTAURANT,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, the both the appeals are allowed

ITA 393/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: PendingITAT Bangalore14 Jun 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan

For Appellant: Shri. V. Padmanaban, CAFor Respondent: Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 28Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

AC ITO, Vs. Restaurant - Bangalore, Ward – 1(2)(1), 100 Ft Road, Indira Nagar, BMTC Building, Bengaluru-560 038. Bengaluru. PAN : AAZFA 0846 P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. V. Padmanaban, CA Revenue by : Shri. Ganesh R Ghale, Standing Counsel for Department. Date of hearing : 14.06.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 14.06.2022 O R D E R ITA No.393Bang/2022 is an appeal

SHRI SADGURU NIRUPADESHWARA NITYA DASOHA CHARITABLE TRUST ANKALIMATH,MAKAPUR, LINGASURU TQ AND RAICHUR DIST vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER,EXEMPTION, EXEMPTION WARD-1,KALBURGI, KALBURGI,

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

ITA 1084/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ramanagowda S Gowdar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian JCIT, DR
Section 12ASection 80G

12. Accordingly, the delay in filling appeal is on account of bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant trust and not on account of negligence on the part of the appellant. Hence, we humbly pray that delay be condoned in view of the peculiar circumstances and facts narrated above and in the interest of the justice. 13. That

SHRI SADGURU NIRUPADESHWARA NITYA DASOHA CHARITABLE TRUST ANKALIMATH,MUDGAL, LINGASURU TQ RAICHUR DIST vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, EXEMPTION WARD-1,KALBURGI, KALBURGI

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

ITA 457/BANG/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 Aug 2025AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Keshav Dubey

For Appellant: Shri Ramanagowda S Gowdar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Subramanian JCIT, DR
Section 12ASection 80G

12. Accordingly, the delay in filling appeal is on account of bona fide circumstances beyond the control of the Appellant trust and not on account of negligence on the part of the appellant. Hence, we humbly pray that delay be condoned in view of the peculiar circumstances and facts narrated above and in the interest of the justice. 13. That

AVESTHAGEN LTD. vs. DY DIT,

In the result, both these appeals are

ITA 884/BANG/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri. S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Ms. Kusum R.H, CA &For Respondent: Smt. Renuka Devi, JCIT
Section 193Section 201Section 201(1)

Ac c o r d in g l y , t h e A . O d e t e rm in e d t h e t a x p a y a b le u / s 2 0 1 ( 1 ) a t Rs.20,11,607/- ie @ 10% of gross receipts and the interest payable IT(IT)A.972/B/2010 & IT(IT)A.884/B/2013

SHRI. K. MUNIRAJU,BANGALORE vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX, CENTRAL, BANGALORE

In the result appeals filed by assessee for asst

ITA 1376/BANG/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A.K Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev C Nulvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Reddy, Standing Counsel to Dept. (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

condoned the delay of 13 days caused by assessee in filing present appeals. 5. Ld.AR submitted that, for all years under consideration, identical Additional Ground Nos:12-13 are raised by assessee, being legal issue, challenging validity of order passed under section 263. For sake of convenience we are reproducing additional ground No. 12-13 from assessment year

SHRI PURUSHOTTAMA NARASIMHA BHARATI SANATANA SABHA,UTTARA KANNADA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTIONS, WARD-1, HUBLI

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

ITA 661/BANG/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Jun 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year : 2024-25

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Hedge, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, JCIT-DR
Section 12A

condone the delay of 16 days in filing the appeal and admit the appeal for the adjudication. 4. Now coming to brief facts of the case is that the assessee trust was granted provisional registration vide no. AALTS5798QE20206 under 02-Sub clause (vi) of clause (ac) of sub-section (1) of section 12A dated 27.05.2021 from