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.

11 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 245clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai128Karnataka104Chennai101Kolkata81Delhi58Bangalore37Jaipur26Pune25Chandigarh11Hyderabad11Cuttack11Ahmedabad9Ranchi8Indore8Lucknow7SC6Varanasi5Surat5Guwahati4Visakhapatnam3Amritsar3Nagpur3Panaji2Cochin2Dehradun1Raipur1Rajasthan1Agra1Calcutta1Andhra Pradesh1Telangana1Allahabad1Patna1

Key Topics

Addition to Income10Section 1518Section 69A7Section 153A6Section 69B6Reassessment5Section 56(2)(vii)4Section 143(3)4Section 148B

JYOTI SHARMA,PINJORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, PANCHKULA

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

ITA 192/CHANDI/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh14 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: None (Adj. Application Rejected)For Respondent: Shri Vivek Vardhan, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 245Section 250Section 271(1)(b)Section 271(1)(c)

condoning the delay. It was accordingly submitted that the said action of the Ld. CIT(A) is bad in law. 4. In the instant case, I find that there was a delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the assessee has submitted reason for the delayed filing of the said appeal by stating that she being

4
Condonation of Delay4
Bogus Purchases4
Reopening of Assessment4

AJIT SINGH,PATIALA vs. ITO, PATIALA

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

ITA 158/CHANDI/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Us, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted An Application For Condonation Of Delay Along With An Affidavit, Which Is Reproduced As Under:-

For Appellant: None (Adjournment Rejected)For Respondent: Smt. Surinder Kaur Waraich, Addl. CIT
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

245 days in filing of the appeal. During the proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee has submitted an application for condonation of delay along with an Affidavit, which is reproduced as under:- 3. I have considered the reasoning given in the affidavit and inclined to condone the delay. 4. The ld. DR did not have any objection

GURMEET SINGH,PUNJAB vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), ROPAR, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 712/CHANDI/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh27 Aug 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 712/Chd/2025 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11 Gurmeet Singh, Ito, बनाम 939, Type Ii, Ward 2(2), Nuhon Colony Ghanauli, Ropar Vs. Rupnagar 140113 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Ageps7897P अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent ( Virtual Hearing ) "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri. Parikshit Aggarwal, Ca राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue By : Smt. Surinder Kaur Waraich, Addl. Cit, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 27-08-2025 उदघोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 27-08-2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Surinder Kaur Waraich, Addl. CIT
Section 147Section 56Section 56(2)(vii)

245 days in filing of the appeal. During the proceedings before us, the ld. Counsel for the Assessee has submitted an application for condonation of delay along with an Affidavit, which is reproduced as under:- 4 6 3. I have considered the reasoning given in the affidavit and inclined to condone the delay. 4. The ld. DR did not have

SHER SINGH,SANGRUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SANGRUR

ITA 749/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh22 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI. LALIET KUMAR (Judicial Member), SHRI. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Gaurav Soni, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 11BSection 144Section 234ASection 234BSection 69ASection 69a

section 115BBE of the Act are not applicable in the case of the appellant and special rate of tax u/s 11BBR of the Act 7 has been applied without giving any proper opportunity to the appellant. therefore, appellate order passed by the learned CIT(A) NFAC and assessment order passed by the learned income tax officer Sangrur is illegal, uncalled

M/S SINGLA BUILDERS AND PROMOTERS LIMITED,RUPNAGAR, PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 487/CHANDI/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) & Shri Rajat Kumar
Section 127Section 132Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 69ASection 69B

245 (SC) stressed the need for exercising caution and for bringing on record relevant, reliable and cogent evidence to corroborate the entries found in loose sheets. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Khosla Rice & General Mills Ltd. (ITA No.208/2011 dated 17-09-2012) confirmed deletion of addition for want of corroborative evidences. In the case

M/S CREDO ASSETS PVT. LTD.,RUPNAGAR PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 482/CHANDI/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) & Shri Rajat Kumar
Section 127Section 132Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 69ASection 69B

245 (SC) stressed the need for exercising caution and for bringing on record relevant, reliable and cogent evidence to corroborate the entries found in loose sheets. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Khosla Rice & General Mills Ltd. (ITA No.208/2011 dated 17-09-2012) confirmed deletion of addition for want of corroborative evidences. In the case

M/S CREDO ASSETS PVT. LTD.,RUPNAGAR PUNJAB vs. DCIT/ACIT(CEN)-1 CHD, CHANDIGARH

The appeals stand partly allowed

ITA 484/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Rajpal Yadav & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am 1. आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.487/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S Singla Builders & Promoters Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaocs-6503-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) & 2. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.482/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2017-18) & 3. आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.484/Chandi/2025 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2018-19) M/S Credo Assets Private Ltd. Dcit / Acit Central-1 बनाम/ Plot No 1265-C, Sector 82, Industrial Area C.R. Building, Sector 17 Vs. Rupnagar (Punjab) 140308 Chandigarh-160017 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aafcc-6400-L (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (""थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (Ca) & Smt. Shruti Khandelwal (Ca) – Ld. Ars ""थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Smt. Kusum Bansal (Cit) & Shri Rajat Kumar Kureel (Cit) – Ld. Drs (Virtual) Date Of Final Hearing : 27-01-2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 03-02-2026

For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal (CA) & Smt. ShrutiFor Respondent: Smt. Kusum Bansal (CIT) & Shri Rajat Kumar
Section 127Section 132Section 142ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 153BSection 69ASection 69B

245 (SC) stressed the need for exercising caution and for bringing on record relevant, reliable and cogent evidence to corroborate the entries found in loose sheets. The Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Khosla Rice & General Mills Ltd. (ITA No.208/2011 dated 17-09-2012) confirmed deletion of addition for want of corroborative evidences. In the case

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 923/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2020-21
Section 148BSection 151

245/СТК/2017 order\ndated 04.11.2019\n\"We also find that there is allegation of the Assessing Officer regarding\nsuppressed production, which were sold in the market. In our\nconsidered opinion, the Ld CIT(A) was also quite correct in taking the\ncognizance of proposition rendered by ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the\ncase of Balaji Steel Rolling Mills

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 922/CHANDI/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2019-20
Section 148BSection 151

245/СТК/2017 order\ndated 04.11.2019\n\"We also find that there is allegation of the Assessing Officer regarding\nsuppressed production, which were sold in the market. In our\nconsidered opinion, the Ld CIT(A) was also quite correct in taking the\ncognizance of proposition rendered by ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the\ncase of Balaji Steel Rolling Mills

ROSHA ALLOYS P LIMITED, AMLOH ROAD, VILLAGE TURAN, MANDI GOBINDGARH,PUNJAB vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1, LUDHIANA, PUNJAB

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 888/CHANDI/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-2019
Section 148BSection 151

245/СТК/2017 order\ndated 04.11.2019\n\"We also find that there is allegation of the Assessing Officer regarding\nsuppressed production, which were sold in the market. In our\nconsidered opinion, the Ld CIT(A) was also quite correct in taking the\ncognizance of proposition rendered by ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the\ncase of Balaji Steel Rolling Mills

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, LUDHIANA , LUDHIANA vs. ROSHA ALLOYS PVT. LTD., MANDI GOBINDGARH

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed,\nwhereas the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 921/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 May 2025AY 2018-19
Section 148BSection 151

245/СТК/2017 order\ndated 04.11.2019\n\"We also find that there is allegation of the Assessing Officer regarding\nsuppressed production, which were sold in the market. In our\nconsidered opinion, the Ld CIT(A) was also quite correct in taking the\ncognizance of proposition rendered by ITAT Hyderabad Bench in the\ncase of Balaji Steel Rolling Mills