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.

170 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 80clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai575Chennai527Delhi406Kolkata312Pune280Bangalore254Ahmedabad215Hyderabad197Jaipur193Karnataka181Chandigarh170Visakhapatnam101Cochin76Indore69Amritsar64Lucknow59Surat46Rajkot43Panaji42Calcutta41Raipur40Cuttack35Guwahati31Nagpur25Patna21SC17Agra16Telangana13Allahabad12Jabalpur10Jodhpur9Varanasi9Dehradun7Ranchi5Orissa3Andhra Pradesh2Rajasthan2Himachal Pradesh1Kerala1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1

Key Topics

Addition to Income26Section 26319Section 1017Section 153A16Condonation of Delay16Section 80I15Section 143(3)13Limitation/Time-bar13Section 147

SANJEEV BATISH,PANCHKULA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

Appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 723/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Nov 2021AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Rohit GoelFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Khanna, Addl. CIT
Section 80Section 80I

delay in filing of appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted to be heard on merit. 4. Shri Rohit Goel appearing on behalf of the assessee submitted that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing and trading of construction chemical. The assessee had claimed deduction @100% under section 80IC in respect of a unit eligible for deduction in the assessment

THE CHAPLAH CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL SERVICE SOCIETY LTD,VPO CHOULI vs. LD. DCIT , CPC, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 170 · Page 1 of 9

...
11
Section 14811
Section 510
Deduction7
ITA 47/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: Disposed
ITAT Chandigarh
04 Oct 2024
AY 2018-19

Bench: The Tribunal Against The Order Dt 25.04.2023 Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi.

For Appellant: Shri T C Verma, Advocate and Shri Aditya Sood, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjeet Kaur, Sr.DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 249Section 250Section 253Section 3Section 5Section 80P

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 5. The issue raised in Ground No.1 is against the order of the CIT(A) upholding disallowance of deduction claimed u/s 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961(in short 'the Act') by the assessee as made by Assessing Officer, CPC in the intimation passed

THE NANAWAN CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE SOCIETY,HAMIRPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, HAMIRPUR

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 953/CHANDI/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Tribunal.

For Appellant: Sh. Alok Krishan (CA) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 119Section 139Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Condonation of delay under clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for returns of income claiming deduction u/s 80P of the Act for various assessment years from A Y 2018-19 to AY 2022-23- Reg. Section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as 'Act') provides for deduction

THE SWAHALWA CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE SERVICE SOCIETY LTD.,DISTT. HAMIRPUR vs. ITO, WARD HAMIPUR, HAMIRPUR

The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 886/CHANDI/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: us.3. I find that the appropriate course of action for the assessee, on the facts of such cases, lies in CBDT Circular No. 13 of 2023 dated 26-07-2023 (F.No.173/2112023-IT A-I) which read as under: -

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Kumar (Advocate) – Ld. ARFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur (Addl. CIT) – Ld. Sr. DR
Section 119Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 80Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

Condonation of delay under clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for returns of income claiming deduction u/s 80P of the Act for various assessment years from A Y 2018-19 to AY 2022-23- Reg. Section 80P of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as 'Act') provides for deduction

MAHESH T. PRASANA,MUMBAI vs. ITO, WARD-1, PARWANOO

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 419/CHANDI/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh18 Oct 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A.D.Jain & Shri Krinwant Sahayआयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 419/Chd/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil Goyal, Advocate, &For Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl.CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 80I

delay in filing of the appeal is hereby condoned and now we proceed to decide this case on merit. 8. The only ground of appeal in this case is against the sustenance of addition of Rs.87,45,366/- by the ld. CIT(A) restricting the deduction claimed under Section 80IC to the extent of 25% as against 100% claimed

CLEVUS LIFESCIENCES ,PARWANOO vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PARWANOO

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

ITA 19/CHANDI/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh09 May 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2013-14 M/S Clevus Lifesciences, Vs. The Dcit, Khasra No. 501, Vill. Kamli, Circle, Sector-6, Parwanoo, Distt-Solan(Hp). Parwanoo. Pan No. : Aaffc4920L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Surinder Babbar, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Chanderkanta, Addl. CIT

delay is condoned. Ordered accordingly. Said order was pronounced in the Open Court before the parties at the time of hearing itself and the parties consequently were directed to argue thereafter the appeal on merits. 3. It was a common stand of the parties before the Bench that the point at issue raised by the assessee in the present proceedings

M/S SHAKTI SPINNERS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-7, LUDHIANA

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 599/CHANDI/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Apr 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: the appeal is finally heard or disposed off.

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. Ranjit Kaur, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 36Section 36(1)

80,05,000/- Cash in Hand 5,10,000/- Building under construction 15,00,000/- TOTAL 1.00.15.000/- 4. The appeal of the assessee has been filed late before the ITAT, for which, the assessee by way of detailed application dated 10.01.2025 filed on 13.01.2025 has given the reasons for delay and has also filed an affidavit

THE TAL CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURE SERVICE SOCIETY LTD.,HAMIRPUR vs. ITO, WARD, HAMIRPUR

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 468/CHANDI/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Mar 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN (Vice President), SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Patiyal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dharamvir, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 10ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 80Section 80ASection 80CSection 80P

80-A C b y Finance Act, 2018 came into play only in 2021-22 assessment year. (v) The slight delay in completing the audit by a Govt. Of Department and the assessee which is of human nature, without any deliberate, malafide, because of reasonable and sufficient cause, these need to be reasonably, sympathetically and favourably considered. 2. The Assessee

M/S OM PLASTICS,BADDI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE, PARWANOO

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

ITA 191/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh25 May 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Diva Singh & Ms. Annapurna Guptaassessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Om Plastics, Vs. The Dcit, Village – Swaraj Majra, Circle, Near Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Parwanoo. Baddi, Distt. Solan (Hp). Pan No. : Abfo4821C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR
Section 80I

delay is, accordingly, condoned. Said order was pronounced in the presence of the parties in the open Court and the parties were accordingly directed to argue the appeal on merits. 5. Considering the sole issue agitated by the assessee in the present appeal, it was a common stand of the parties before the Bench that the issue is covered

DCIT, CIRCLE, YAMUNANAGAR vs. M/S SYMBIOSIS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT. LTD., YAMUNANAGAR

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 326/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Jan 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: The Due Date As Prescribed In Section 139(1) Of The I.T. Act, 1961 Whereas The Assessee Has Filed Its Return Of Income After The Due Date.

For Appellant: Shri Dhruv Goyal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sarabjeet Singh, CIT-DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 80ASection 80I

condonation of the said infraction, even if a return is filed in terms of sub section (4), Accepting such a plea would mean that a person who had not filed a return within the due time as prescribed under sub section (1) of (2) of section 139 would not get benefit by filing the return under section 139(4) much

BALBIR KUMAR HUF,CHANDIGARH vs. ITO , CHANDIGARH

ITA 172/CHANDI/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

INCOME TAX OFFICER, FATEHABAD vs. MAHESH NAGPAL, FATEHABAD

ITA 531/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

ARJESH KUMAR,PATIALA vs. ITO NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE , DELHI

ITA 876/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

SAROJ CHAUDHARY BALA,PANCHKULA vs. ITO, WARD-4, PANCHKULA

ITA 635/CHANDI/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

PAWAN KUMAR,FATEHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-1, FATEHABAD

ITA 1112/CHANDI/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

ITA 565/CHANDI/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

SMT. SHANKRI DEVI,PANCHKULA vs. ACIT, PANCKULA CIRCLE, PANCHKULA

ITA 596/CHANDI/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

SH. AMARDEEP SINGH ATHWAL,YAMUNANAGAR vs. ITO, WARD-1, YAMUNANAGAR

ITA 566/CHANDI/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

RANJIT SINGH,PANCHKULA vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, CPC DEPARTMENT

ITA 992/CHANDI/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Suraj Bhan Nain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Manav Bansal, CIT, DR

condone the delay in filing these appeals. 3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y 2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the following effective grounds: 1. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals

KAKA SINGH ALIAS GULJAR SINGH,PATIALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , PATIALA

ITA 663/CHANDI/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Nov 2025AY 2020-21
For Respondent: \nShri Suraj Bhan Nain, Advocate

condone the delay in filing these appeals.\n3. We shall take appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 463/Chd/2023 for A.Y\n2018-19 as a lead case for discussion wherein assessee has raised the\nfollowing effective grounds:\n1.\nThat having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case\nand in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals