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.

31 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 250clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,324Kolkata837Chennai745Delhi603Pune568Bangalore497Ahmedabad409Patna333Jaipur316Raipur219Surat214Indore189Amritsar188Rajkot174Nagpur173Hyderabad160Panaji120Chandigarh115Cochin102Karnataka102Lucknow99Visakhapatnam83Agra70Guwahati68Calcutta41Jabalpur35Cuttack31Allahabad27Jodhpur20Dehradun13Ranchi12Varanasi10SC4Himachal Pradesh1Andhra Pradesh1Telangana1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 25028Addition to Income19Section 271(1)(c)18Section 11(2)16Condonation of Delay15Section 143(3)13Section 14711Section 143(1)(a)11Section 143(1)

KAPILDEV DUBEY,MAYURBHANJ vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2,BARIPADA, MAYURBHANJ

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

ITA 185/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack16 Jun 2025AY 2017-18
For Appellant: P.K. Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: S.C. Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 69A

condoned the significant delay in filing the appeal due to the assessee's medical condition. It noted that proper representation was not made at lower appellate stages and deemed it appropriate to provide another opportunity for the assessee to present their case.", "result": "Remanded", "sections": [ "143(3)", "250

WOMEN ORGANISATION FOR SOCIO CULTURAL AWARNESS,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,EXEMPTIONS, CUTTACK

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

Showing 1–20 of 31 · Page 1 of 2

10
Deduction10
Limitation/Time-bar9
Section 198
ITA 67/CTK/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack22 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 143(1)Section 250

condonation of the delay committed in filing the Audit Report in Form No. 10B. 06. That the Notice under section 250

MR. NARENDRA KUMA RBAL,KEONJHAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KEONJHAR WARD, KEONJHAR

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

ITA 178/CTK/2025[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack28 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “A. For that, the order of the forums below are illegal absurd, improper and excessive in the facts and circumstances of the case, hence the orders passed are liable to be deleted. B. For that

BARUAN SERVICE CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED,JAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAJPUR WARD, JAJPUR, JAJPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical\npurposes

ITA 277/CTK/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 Jul 2025AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri N.R.Biswal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashim Kr Chakraborty, CIT DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

condoned the delay, set aside the CIT(A)'s order, and restored the matter for fresh adjudication.", "result": "Allowed", "sections": ["147", "148", "142(1)", "144", "144B", "69A", "250

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO,EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

ITA 437/CTK/2024[AY 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AYs 2014-15 & 2015- 16 dated 24.08.2024, which have been passed against the rectification orders u/s 154 of the Act, dated 19.12.2016. Since the issues are common, both the appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience

GRAM VIKAS TRUST,BERHAMPUR vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, BERAMPUR

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee for AYs 2014-

ITA 436/CTK/2024[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234BSection 250

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AYs 2014-15 & 2015- 16 dated 24.08.2024, which have been passed against the rectification orders u/s 154 of the Act, dated 19.12.2016. Since the issues are common, both the appeals were heard together and are being decided vide this common order for the sake of convenience

JEEVAN KALYANA SADHANA KENDRA,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, SAMBALPUR

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

ITA 195/CTK/2025[2023-24]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack28 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 250

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2023-24 dated 30.01.2025, which has been passed against the intimation order u/s 143(1) of the Act, dated 13.12.2024. I.T.A. No.: 195/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jeevan Kalyana Sadhana Kendra. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds

PRAMOD KUMAR SAHOO,KEONJHAR vs. ITO,KEONJHAR WARD, , KEONJHAR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 148/CTK/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack02 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: The Ld. Ao There Was Absolutely No Response To Notices Fixing The Dates For Hearing After The Proceedings Had Been Initiated U/S 147 Of The Act. Thereafter, The Ld. Ao Proceeded To Add Rs. 12,00,000/- On Account Of Expenditure From Unknown Sources Incurred In The Marriage Ceremony Of The Assesses Daughter.

Section 147Section 250Section 5

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Addl./JCIT(A)-11, Mumbai [hereafter “the Ld. CIT(A)”] vide order dated 07.01.2025 for AY 2011-12, against the order passed by the Ld. AO. It is seen that before the Ld. AO there was absolutely no response to notices

DREAM INDIA TRANSFORMATION,NABARANGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD, BERHAMPUR

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

ITA 341/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 144Section 250Section 253

Section 253 of the Act; (b) Admit and hear the accompanying appeal on merits; and (c) Pass such other order(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 1.1 Considering the reasons given in the said petition, the delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The present

URMILA KISHAN,ANGUL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

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

ITA 191/CTK/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack12 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

condonation of delay has been filed by the assessee stating as under: “I URMILA KISHAN, submits that the present appeal has been filed before this Hon'ble Tribunal with a delay of 322 days beyond the prescribed limitation period from order under section 250

KAMYAB EXPORTS (P) LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 538/CTK/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.538 & 539/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year 2009-10 Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Dcit, Corporate Circle No.301, No.301, Royal Royal Height Height Bhubaneswar Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Vihar, , Bhubaneswar , Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No.Aacck 5144 N .Aacck 5144 N (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty , Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty , AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

250 of the Act. ITA No.539/CTK/2014 is an 539/CTK/2014 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), dated 15.3.2024 in the matter of penalty under section

KAMYAB EXPORTS (P) LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1), BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 539/CTK/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack31 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Before Shri George Mathanmember & Manish Agarwal Manish Agarwalita Nos.538 & 539/Ctk/2024 Assessment Year 2009-10 Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Kamyab Exports Pvt Ltd.,Plot Vs. Dcit, Corporate Circle-1(1), Dcit, Corporate Circle No.301, No.301, Royal Royal Height Height Bhubaneswar Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Apartment, Lane No.10, Jaydev Vihar, , Bhubaneswar , Bhubaneswar Pan/Gir No.Aacck 5144 N .Aacck 5144 N (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri P.R.Mohanty , Adv , Adv Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 31/12/20 2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/12/20 024 O R D E R Per Bench

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty , AdvFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

250 of the Act. ITA No.539/CTK/2014 is an 539/CTK/2014 is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld CIT(A), dated 15.3.2024 in the matter of penalty under section

M/S. NORTH EASTERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ODISHA LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

ITA 17/CTK/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well

M/S. WESTERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ORISSA LTD.,SAMBALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

ITA 220/CTK/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well

WESTERN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ORISSA LTD.,SAMBALPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

ITA 125/CTK/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well

M/S. NORTH ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY OF ODISHA,BHUBANESWAR vs. ACIT,CIRCLE-1(2), BHUBANESWAR

In the result, appeals of both the assessees stand partly allowed

ITA 16/CTK/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack01 Feb 2023AY 2011-12
For Appellant: Shri P.V.Rao/Sidharth Ranjan, CAsFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CIT-DR
Section 19

250 days. Further there is a delay of 325 day in filing the appeal for A.Y.2013-2014. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed stating sufficient reasons to condone the abovesaid delay. Ld. CIT-DR also did not object to condone the delay in the said cases. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case as well

HEMANT KUMAR MAJHI,KONGARA vs. ITO, JEYPORE WARD, JEYPORE

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

ITA 65/CTK/2025[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack28 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250Section 69A

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) for AY 2019-20 dated 09.08.2024, which has been passed against the assessment order u/s 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act, dated 27.02.2024. I.T.A. No.: 65/CTK/2025 Assessment Year: 2019-20 Hemant Kumar Majhi. 1.1. The Registry has informed that the appeal filed by the assessee is barred

SURESH KUMAR SOMANI,MALKANGIRI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BERHAMPUR, BERHAMPUR

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

ITA 55/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack21 Nov 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumarita No.55 /Ctk/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Suresh Kumar Somani…………………………………................……….……Appellant Motu Road, Korukonda B.O, Alur, Malkangiri (Odisha), Odissa - 764045.. [Pan: Acxps8005Q] Vs. Acit, Berhampur………....………..…………………………...……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri R. B. Doshi, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Vijay Singh, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : August 19, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 21, 2025 Order Per Rajesh Kumar: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 22.03.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [‘Cit(A)’] Passed Under Section 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For The Assessment Year 2017–18. 2. The Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee With A Delay Of 228 Days. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of The Delay. After Considering The Reasons Cited In The Affidavit For Condonation Of Delay, We Find That The Reasons Are Valid & Consequently, The Delay In Filing The Appeal Is Hereby Condoned & We Proceed To Dispose Of The Appeal On Merits.

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 40A(3)

Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) for the assessment year 2017–18. 2. The appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 228 days. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation

BIPIN NATH,KUAKHIA vs. ITO, WARD(1), CUTTACK, CUTTACK

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

ITA 632/CTK/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack23 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru R.L Reddy(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumarआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.632/Ctk/2025 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18) Bipin Nath Rasulpur, Kabirpur, Vs Ito, Ward (1), Cuttack Jajpur-755009, Odisha Pan No. : Apspn 5964 P (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Arun Kr Dash & Biswaranjan Panda, Ars राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Vijaya Singh, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 23 /12/2025 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23 /12/2025

For Appellant: Shri Arun Kr Dash and BiswaranjanFor Respondent: Shri Vijaya Singh, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250(6)Section 263

delay of 45 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned and the appeal of the assessee is admitted for hearing. 2 3. Ld AR of the assessee submitted that the ld CIT(A) has passed the order exparte without affording reasonable opportunity to the assessee. It was the submission that the assessee has not received any notice

ODISHA INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION(IDCO),BHUBANESWAR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1), BHUBANESWAR, BHUBANESWAR

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

ITA 365/CTK/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack11 Nov 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अपील सं/Ita No.365/Ctk/2024 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-2016) M/S Odisha Industrial Infrastructure Vs Dcit, Circle-4(1), Bhubaneswar Development Corporation, Idco Tower, Janpath, Bhubaneswar Pan No. : Aaaat 2619 K (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bibekananda Mohanty, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 12/11/2024 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 12/11/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 25.05.2023, Passed In Appeal No.Cit(A), Bhubaneswar-2/10971/2017-18 Vide Din & Order No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2023-24/1053183739(1) For The Assessment Year 2015-2016. 2. On Perusal Of The Appeal Record, We Found That The Appeal Of The Assessee Has Been Filed Belatedly By 409 Days. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Filed Condonation Application Along With Affidavit Stating Sufficient Reasons For Delay In Filing The Present Appeal. The Contents Of The Affidavit Filed By The Assessee Are As Under :-

For Appellant: Shri Bibekananda Mohanty, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Abani Kanta Nayak, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 37(1)Section 40

delay in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is heard finally. 5. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal :- 1. That, the assessment order U/s 143(3) read with 144B and U/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is against law, weight of evidences and probabilities of the case. 2. The appellant being