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.

37 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 108clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai178Mumbai170Karnataka122Delhi100Kolkata100Ahmedabad92Bangalore65Jaipur49Pune49Hyderabad48Calcutta38Chandigarh37Cuttack25Rajkot25Nagpur23Indore21Guwahati16Surat14Lucknow11Agra11Patna10Cochin9Raipur6SC5Jodhpur5Amritsar4Punjab & Haryana3Visakhapatnam2Jabalpur2Telangana2Orissa1Dehradun1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Varanasi1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 26331Section 1018Section 153A12Section 511Limitation/Time-bar10Addition to Income10Section 2537Section 2507Section 147

NARESH KUMAR KAMBOJ,ZIRAKPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PANCHKULA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 337/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Pandey, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 10Section 143(1)

delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) has been condoned by the Tribunal and the matter has been restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh. 4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also placed reliance on the decision dated 20.09.2023 of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in bunch

SH. MARTIN EKKA S/O SH. LALSAY EKKA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD -1, PANCHKULA

In the result, the ground no

Showing 1–20 of 37 · Page 1 of 2

7
Condonation of Delay7
Section 143(3)6
Exemption5
ITA 281/CHANDI/2023[2017-18]Status: Disposed
ITAT Chandigarh
27 Mar 2024
AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 143(1)

delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) has been condoned by ITA-281/CHD/2023 A.Y. 2017-18 Page 4 of 24 the Tribunal and the matter has been restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh. 4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also placed reliance on the decision dated

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 730/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 270ASection 5

108 ITR(Trib) 14 (ITAT Surat) The prayer is for condoning the delay in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the case. Your honor is humbly requested to condone the delay of 282 days in filing of appeal for the A.Y. 2017-18 and hear the appeal on merits of the case. Thanking You Yours faithfully For Ch. Lekh

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA. vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 763/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 270ASection 5

108 ITR(Trib) 14 (ITAT Surat) The prayer is for condoning the delay in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the case. Your honor is humbly requested to condone the delay of 282 days in filing of appeal for the A.Y. 2017-18 and hear the appeal on merits of the case. Thanking You Yours faithfully For Ch. Lekh

CH LEKH RAJ EDUCATIONAL AND CHARITABLE TRUST,YAMUNA NAGAR, HARYANA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), CIRCLE-2, CHANDIGARH, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the three appeals are allowed

ITA 764/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Jan 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Krinwant Sahay

For Appellant: Shri B.M.Monga and Shri Rohit Kaura, AdvocatesFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT DR
Section 253Section 270ASection 5

108 ITR(Trib) 14 (ITAT Surat) The prayer is for condoning the delay in accordance with the facts and circumstances of the case. Your honor is humbly requested to condone the delay of 282 days in filing of appeal for the A.Y. 2017-18 and hear the appeal on merits of the case. Thanking You Yours faithfully For Ch. Lekh

DAYAL SINGH,VILL FATEHPUR PO BUREWALA vs. ITO WARD-1, PANCHKULA

In the result, the ground no

ITA 519/CHANDI/2024[AY 2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Dec 2024

Bench: Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 519/Chd/2024 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 बनाम Dayal Singh, The Ito, Vill Fatehpur Ward -1, Po Burewala Panchkula Distt.Amabla 134204 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Acdps7697G अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Physical Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri Y.R. Saini, Adv. राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Sh. Vivek Vardhan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 11.11.2024 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 03.12.2024 आदेश/Order The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 20.03.2024 Passed By The Ld. Addl. / Jcit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, For The Assessment Year 2017-18. 2. The Assess Ee In This Appeal H As Taken Foll Owing Groun Ds Of Appeal: 1 That In The F Acts & Circumstance Of The Case The Id. Addl/Jcit (A)-9 Mumbai Of Cit (A)( Nfac) Has Erred In Law By Placing Reliance On Judgement Of Hon'Ble Apex Court In The Case Of Maji Sinneman Vs Reddy

For Appellant: Shri Y.R. Saini, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vivek Vardhan, JCIT
Section 10Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 270A

delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) has been condoned by the Tribunal and the matter has been restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh. 4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also placed reliance on the decision dated 20.09.2023 of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in bunch

SHRI ADISH OSWAL,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1417/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, JCIT DR
Section 68

condone the delay and the appeal is admitted. 8. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal. 1. That the order passed by the CIT(A) is without application of mind. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of long term capital gains of Rs. 59,15,108/- by wrongly applying the provisions of section

SH. ASHOK KUMAR OSWAL (DECEASED) THROUGH MRS. MANJU OSWAL (LEGAL HEIR),LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, C-7, LUDHIANA

In the result, appeals of the Assessees are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1418/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Oct 2020AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Subhash Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arvind Sudarshan, JCIT DR
Section 68

condone the delay and the appeal is admitted. 8. Following grounds have been raised in this appeal. 1. That the order passed by the CIT(A) is without application of mind. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of long term capital gains of Rs. 59,15,108/- by wrongly applying the provisions of section

SATINDER PAUL THROUGH L/H NEELAM SAINI,PINJORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PANCHKULA

In the result, the ground no

ITA 136/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh30 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. SANJAY GARG (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Smt. Neelam Dhiman, C.AFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 10Section 10(10)Section 143(1)

delay in filing the appeal before the ld. CIT(A) has been condoned by the Tribunal and the matter has been restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh. 4. The ld. Counsel for the assessee has also placed reliance on the decision dated 20.09.2023 of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in bunch

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 360/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2020-21
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

condone the delay in filing Cross\nObjection because there was no malafide intention. The\nassessee has not adopted a delaying strategy to litigate with\nthe Revenue.\n10.1 Apart from above, we are of the view that since legal\nissues are being raised by the assessee in its Cross\nObjections, therefore, Rule 27 of ITAT Rules empowers it as a\nrespondent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2 LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED , DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 356/CHANDI/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

condone the delay in filing Cross\nObjection because there was no malafide intention. The\nassessee has not adopted a delaying strategy to litigate with\nthe Revenue.\n10.1 Apart from above, we are of the view that since legal\nissues are being raised by the assessee in its Cross\nObjections, therefore, Rule 27 of ITAT Rules empowers it as a\nrespondent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 357/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

condone the delay in filing Cross\nObjection because there was no malafide intention. The\nassessee has not adopted a delaying strategy to litigate with\nthe Revenue.\n10.1 Apart from above, we are of the view that since legal\nissues are being raised by the assessee in its Cross\nObjections, therefore, Rule 27 of ITAT Rules empowers it as a\nrespondent

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2,, LUDHIANA vs. AB ALCOBEV PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, appeals of Revenue are dismissed, Cross\nObjections of the assessee for

ITA 358/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh01 Sept 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 153DSection 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

condone the delay in filing Cross\nObjection because there was no malafide intention. The\nassessee has not adopted a delaying strategy to litigate with\nthe Revenue.\n10.1 Apart from above, we are of the view that since legal\nissues are being raised by the assessee in its Cross\nObjections, therefore, Rule 27 of ITAT Rules empowers it as a\nrespondent

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 147/CHANDI/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 3, 4 and 4.1 are not pressed. Accordingly, these grounds are rejected. 7. Ground No.1 is general and needs no adjudication. 8. Apropos Ground Nos.2 to 2.7, the facts are that the ld. PCIT issued a Show Cause Notice dated 06.08.2019 to the assessee

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 146/CHANDI/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 3, 4 and 4.1 are not pressed. Accordingly, these grounds are rejected. 7. Ground No.1 is general and needs no adjudication. 8. Apropos Ground Nos.2 to 2.7, the facts are that the ld. PCIT issued a Show Cause Notice dated 06.08.2019 to the assessee

M/S DIN DAYAL PURSOTAM LAL,SIRSA vs. PR.CIT, ROHTAK

ITA 148/CHANDI/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI A.D.JAIN (Vice President), SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Rohit Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 263Section 40A(3)

delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication. 6. Ground Nos. 3, 4 and 4.1 are not pressed. Accordingly, these grounds are rejected. 7. Ground No.1 is general and needs no adjudication. 8. Apropos Ground Nos.2 to 2.7, the facts are that the ld. PCIT issued a Show Cause Notice dated 06.08.2019 to the assessee

SANT KIRPAL VIDYAK MISSION,LUDHIANA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 561/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 May 2025AY 2017-18
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 154Section 250

108 without any reasonable cause for the same in\nviolation of section 12A. In response, on 13.08.2019, the assessee again submitted\na similar reply as earlier and added that withdrawal of exemption u/s 11 and 12\ncan be done only by the Commissioner of Income Tax.\n14.1 The reply of the assessee is not acceptable. Under the provisions of section

SUKHRAJ SINGH AND COMPANY,MOGA vs. THE PCIT-I, LUDHIANA, LUDHIANA

The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 553/CHANDI/2023[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh12 Aug 2025AY 2015-2016

Bench: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV (Vice President), SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) – Ld. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay and proceed for adjudication of the appeal on merits. 3. The Ld. AR advanced arguments supporting the assessment order and made out a case of one of the possible views as taken by Ld. AO during the course of regular assessment proceedings. The Ld. CIT- DR, on the other hand, advanced arguments supporting the impugned revisionary order

SH. BALJINDER SINGH,CHANDIGARH vs. PR.CIT, CHANDIGARH -1, CHANDIGARH

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 167/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That on law, facts & circumstances of the case, the Worthy Pr. CIT has grossly erred assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 even when

RAKESH KUMAR,JAGADHRI vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, PANCHKULA

In the result, all the above appeals filed by the respective assessee’s are dismissed

ITA 456/CHANDI/2024[2015-16 ]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Feb 2026

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. KRINWANT SAHAY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, C.A (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 167/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That on law, facts & circumstances of the case, the Worthy Pr. CIT has grossly erred assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 even when