Search: condonation of delay | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

48 results for “condonation of delay”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,708 Mumbai1,592 Delhi1,308 Pune853 Kolkata828 Ahmedabad795 Bangalore714 Jaipur548 Hyderabad523 Chandigarh360 Patna295 Visakhapatnam293 Surat292 Raipur281 Amritsar253 Indore238 Cuttack218 Lucknow216 Cochin211 Karnataka199 Nagpur178 Agra164 Panaji158 Rajkot152 Calcutta82 Jodhpur65 Guwahati58 Dehradun48 Allahabad45 Jabalpur37 Ranchi29 SC24 Telangana22 Varanasi20 Rajasthan6 Kerala5 Himachal Pradesh4 Orissa4 Andhra Pradesh2 A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1 DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1 Gauhati1 Punjab & Haryana1

Key Topics

Addition to Income34 Natural Justice33 Section 20126 Condonation of Delay24 Section 143(3)21 Section 14419 Section 14815 Section 14711 Section 234E

NARENDER KUMAR JAIN,RISHIKESH vs. THE INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(4)(1), RISHIKESH

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 36/DDN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Juneja, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma, Sr.DR

Section 143Section 249

natural justice, the unintended delay caused in filing the appeal be condoned.” 3. The Ld. CIT(A) without satisfying with

NARENDER KUMAR JAIN,RISHIKESH vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1(4)(1), RISHIKESH

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

Showing 1–20 of 48 · Page 1 of 3

10

Limitation/Time-bar9

ITA 35/DDN/2020[2015-16]Status: Disposed

ITAT Dehradun

29 Apr 2022

AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B.R.R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri K. K. Juneja, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Sharma, Sr.DR

Section 143Section 249

natural justice, the unintended delay caused in filing the appeal be condoned.” 3. The Ld. CIT(A) without satisfying with

MUKUL GARG,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, ROORKEE

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 32/DDN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Aug 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 32/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2021-22) Mukul Garg, Vs. Income Tax Officer 383/1, Jadugar Road, Civil Roorkee Lines, Roorkee H. O., Uttarakhand Haridwar, Uttarakhand, India, 247667 Pan: Afdpg7612J Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Rajiv Sahni, Ca Revenue By Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

Section 154Section 154A

condoning the delay in latches in filing the first appeal and the order impugned is against principals of natural justice

KARAN VIR SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. VEENA RANI, INCOME TAX OFFICER, GURGAON

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 58/DDN/2026[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Apr 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Sanjay Awasthikaran Vir Singh Vs Veena, Rani, Income Tax D-79, Secdtor-4, Defence Officer, Ward 2(3), Income Tax Colony, Dehradun, Department, Gurgaon, Uttarakhand Haryana Pan: Ahzps8477K (Respondent) (Applicant) Appellant By Sh. Vimal Kishore, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 06.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15.04.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 367 days in filing the present Appeal. 3 Karan Vir Singh Vs. ITO 6. An assessment order came to be passed on 19/12/2018 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before

HASEEN,HARIDWAR vs. I T O ,WARD 1(3)(1),, HARIDWAR

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 95/DDN/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Apr 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Sanjay Awasthihaseen Vs Ito 38, Gadowali, Bahadarpur Jat, Ward 1(3)(1), Income Tax Haridwar-249404 Office, Yogi Bhawan, Industrial Pan: Aodph1131G Area, Haridwar, Uttarakhand (Applicant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Pankaj Goel, Adv Respondent By Sh. Akash Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 07.04.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 15 .04.2026 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld.

Section 144BSection 147

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 201 days in filing the present Appeal. 3 Haseen vs. ITO 6. Brief facts of the case are on merit are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 22/03/2022 u/s 147 r.w. S 144 read with Section 144B of the Income

SH. SANJAY KUMAR,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARD-1(2)(3), DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical

ITA 84/DDN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sanjay Kumar Vs Income Tax Officer, 34 34Shankerpurhukumatpur Ward 1(2)(3), Dehradun, 248197, Uttarakhand, Uttarakhand Pan: Aaubpk4159P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Rajiv Sahini, Ca Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit, Dr Date Of Hearing 11/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 23/12/2025

Section 143(3)Section 69

condoned the delay of ‘more than one year’ in filing the First Appeal and dismissed the Appeal in-limine for delay in latches at Paragraph-3 of the order impugned. However, the Ld. CIT(A) further adjudicated the Appeal on its merits and once again dismissed the Appeal in Paragraph 5 of the order impugned. Once, the Appeal is dismissed

USHA GARG,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 76/DDN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun06 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 144Section 147Section 148

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 419 days in filing the present Appeals. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 23/12/2016 and 29/12/2016 u/s 144 r.w. Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee

USHA GARG,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed for

ITA 77/DDN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun06 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

Section 144Section 147Section 148

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 419 days in filing the present Appeals. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 23/12/2016 and 29/12/2016 u/s 144 r.w. Section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by computing the income of the Assessee

A.P.ASSOCIATES,HARIDWAR vs. ACIT, HARIDWAR

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 37/DDN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 25/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 26/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2014-15)

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 766 days in filing the captioned Appeals. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment orders for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2015-16 came to be passed on 29/12/2017 u/s Section143(3)/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain

A.P.ASSOCIATES,HARIDWAR vs. CIT(A), DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 25/DDN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 25/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 26/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2014-15)

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 766 days in filing the captioned Appeals. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment orders for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2015-16 came to be passed on 29/12/2017 u/s Section143(3)/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain

AP, ASSOCIATES,HARIDWAR vs. CIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 26/DDN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun22 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 25/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2013-14) I.T.A. No. 26/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2014-15)

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 766 days in filing the captioned Appeals. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessment orders for Assessment Year 2013-14 to 2015-16 came to be passed on 29/12/2017 u/s Section143(3)/148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain

DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, DEHRADUN vs. SWARNGANGA CONSTRUCTION P.LTD, BHILWARA

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

ITA 186/DDN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri V.P. Rao

For Appellant: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Sh. Kapil Goel, Advocate

Section 144Section 153CSection 249(3)Section 250(4)Section 271(1)(c)

nature of absolute evidence which by itself could suggest/divulge the undisclosed income without any further act of investigation/examination. The detailed examination of such material of having undisclosed material or not, is the step envisaged only after the issue of notice u/s 153C. 12. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) in law while

SIDHBALI CORPORATION,KOTDWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KOTDWAR

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 97/DDN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 97/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2016-17) Sidhbali Corporation Vs. Income Tax Officer Old Sidhbali Marg, Kotdwear, Income Tax Pauri, Uttarakhand Office,Nazibabad Road, Pan: Ackfs7264E Kotdwar, Pauri, Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. B. R. Garg,Adv Revenue By Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025 Order Per Yogesh Kumar, U.S. Jm: The Present Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/Jcit(A)- Gurugram

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 421 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 30/12/2018 by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 14,65,180/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 2,47,120/- by making

MOHD SHAZAD,HARIDWAR vs. ITO, ROORKEE

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 139/DDN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

delay of 340 days in filing the Appeal is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 20/12/2018 by computing the income of the Assessee at Rs. 1,32,97,981/-, as against the returned income of Rs. 8,30,910/- by making certain addition. Aggrieved by the assessment order

ANNU KUMAR,ROORKEE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DERHADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 79/DDN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Annu Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer, C/O. Hemant Arora & Co. Subhash Road, Llp 354-B, 30 Civil Lines, Dehradun, Roorkee Roorkee, Uttarakhand Uttarakhand Pan: Bttpk3087N Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Pavitra Arora, Ca Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/07/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 10/07/2025 Order

Section 144Section 144B

natural justice. Further submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) committed grave error in not condoning the delay of 348 days

HORRAWAL KISAN SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 204/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 204/Ddn/2024 (A.Y 2017-18) Horrawal Kisan Sewa Sahkari Vs. Income Tax Officer Samiti Limited, Horawala Fss Ward-1(1)(3) Harawala, Post Horrawal, Dehradun Dehradun 248001, Uttarakhand Uttarakhand Pan: Aagfh4362L Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Suhil Kumar, Adv Revenue By Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 05/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 08/08/2025

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 149 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. An assessment order came to be passed on 18/11/2019 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which has been dismissed on 23/04/2024

DHAREMENDRA SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W-2(1)(4), , RUDRAPUR

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 6/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwal

delay of 352 days in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the Assessee is an ex-service man who has been posted in different locations, therefore, the notice issued by the Department has not been served on the Assessee which resulted in passing the ex-parte order by both

POORAN SINGH RANA,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(2)(1), DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Appellant is partly allowed for

ITA 282/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthipooran Singh Rana Vs Income Tax Officer Ward No. 6, Village Kandal, Ward 1(1) (2) Koti, Athoorwala, Dehradun, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Uttarakhand Pan: Bajpr8145P Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Rajiv Shani, Ca Revenue By Sh. Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18/02/2026

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 245days in filing the present Appeal. 3 Pooran Singh Rana Vs. ITO 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 20/12/2019 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred

MADHUR SHARMA,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 1(5), DEHRADUN

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

ITA 2091/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 May 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 143Section 271BSection 44A

justice on mertis in preference to the approach which scuttles a decision on merits. Turning to the facts of the matter giving rise to the present appeal, we are satisfied that sufficient cause exists for the delay. The order of the High Court dismissing the appeal before it as time barred, is therefore. set aside. Delay is condoned

KUNWAR TOSEEN,KOTDWAR DISTT. PAURI GARHWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , KOTDWAR

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

ITA 179/DDN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Apr 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. DR

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 271A

condonation of delay in filing the appeal and appeals. It is a material fact that legal heirs of assessee were not served with any notices under the Act and were not afforded an opportunity of being heard as per principles of natural justice