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.

38 results for “condonation of delay”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,090Chennai1,081Delhi753Ahmedabad671Pune495Jaipur457Kolkata434Bangalore418Hyderabad415Chandigarh309Patna296Raipur271Indore262Surat231Visakhapatnam190Amritsar186Lucknow170Rajkot170Agra160Nagpur160Panaji151Cuttack141Cochin92Jodhpur54Guwahati49Dehradun38Jabalpur34Ranchi28Allahabad26SC24Varanasi6A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Addition to Income27Natural Justice27Section 143(3)20Condonation of Delay19Section 14815Section 14413Section 14710Limitation/Time-bar9Section 80

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

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 Dehradun

Showing 1–20 of 38 · Page 1 of 2

8
Section 153A7
Section 686
Section 80I6
23 Dec 2025
AY 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

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)

Section 143(3)

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)

Section 143(3)

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. 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)

Section 143(3)

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

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

Section 154

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

Section 144

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

Section 143(3)

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

Section 144

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

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

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

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

ITA 178/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

PANIYALA KISAN SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,PANIYALA ROORKEE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3)(5) NOW WARD-1(3)(4) AT ROORKEE, ROORKEE

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

ITA 106/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun07 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

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

delay in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned. 5. The Ld. Departmental Representative vehemently submitted that the Assessee has neither appeared before the A.O. nor participated in the first appellate proceedings, therefore, the authorities below have rightly passed the orders which requires no interference at the hands of the Tribunal. The Ld. Department's Representative relying on the order

DEVENDRA SINGH CHEEMA,NAINITAL vs. ITO, WARD-2(3)(1), NAINITAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1/DDN/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganesh(Through Video Conferencing) Devendra Singh Cheema, Vs. Ito, Bisht Bhawan Compound, Ward-2(3)(1), Tallital, Nainital, Nainital Uttarakhand (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Adupc2094D Assessee By : Shri Pavan Kumar Nath, Adv Revenue By: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 20/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 09/04/2025

For Appellant: Shri Pavan Kumar Nath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 68

justice, the delay is hereby condoned and appeal of the assessee is admitted for adjudication. Devendra Singh Cheema 3. The only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CIT(A) was justified in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,55,000/- made

SHRI SHIV MANDIR PRABANDH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, WARS 1(2)(3) , DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 252/DDN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthishiv Mandir Prabandh Samiti Vs Ito 135, Dharampur, Uttarakhand Ward-1(2)(3) Pan: Aayas3503P Dehradun, Uttarakhand Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Rajiv Sahni, Ca Revenue By Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 10/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement 18/02/2026

Section 12ASection 143Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 488 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee having a temple, temple premises, Dharamshala and temple shops atDharampur, 3 Shri Shiv Mandir Vs. ITO Haridwar Road, Dehradun. The Assessee filed return of income at loss

RUPESH SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ADDITIONAL/JOINT/DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 29/DDN/2026[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun10 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2020-21] Rupesh Singh Vs Dcit Old Post Office Road Dehradun Banjarawala, Kedarwala Uttarakhand Ajabpur, Dehradun Uttarakhand Pan-Bcfps3008C Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Prashant Kochhar, Ca Respondent By Shri Amar Pal Singh, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 10.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 10.03.2026 Order Per Manish Agarwal, Am : The Present Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.09.2025 By Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (A), Nfac, Delhi [“Ld.Cit(A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“The Act”] Arising Out Of Assessment Order Dated 06.01.20225 Passed U/S 147 R.W.S. 144 R.W.S. 144B Of The Act Pertaining To Assessment Year 2020-21. 2. From The Perusal Of The Appellate Order, It Is Found That Ld. Cit(A) Has Not Admitted The Appeal As It Was Filed Delay By 50 Days Before The Ld. Cit(A). The Reasons Given In Delay Condonation Petition Was That Due To Ill Health Of The Previous Counsel, Delay Was Occurred In Searching & Appointing New Counsel. It Is Further Claimed That Assessee Is Unaware Of Any Communication, Notice & The Proceedings Initiated By The Department. Thus, Due To These Reasons, The Appeal Was Filed Delayed Before The Ld. Cit(A) By 50 Days. The Reason Being Sufficient, Therefore, It Was Prayed Before The Ld. Cit(A) To Condone The Delay & Decide The Appeal On Merits. It Is Further Observed That Despite Of Several Notices, Assessee Has Failed To Make Any Compliance Before The Ld. Cit(A).

Section 147Section 250

delay in filing the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) therefore the same is hereby condoned. Regarding merits of the appeal, it is observed AO has not made any compliance before the lower authorities. In the light of these facts and as a principle of the natural justice

MR. JAVED MAHAMMAD,U.S.NAGAR vs. ITO, KHATIMA

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

ITA 34/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun13 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 34/Ddn/2025 (A.Y 2017-18) Javed Mohammad Vs. Ito Bhoor Mohalia, Khatima, Khatima Udham Singh Nagar, Uttarakhand Uttarakhand Pan: Avepm9410H Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Mohitdev, Adv Revenue By Sh. Amar Pal Singh, Jcit, Dr Date Of Hearing 07/08/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 13/08/2025

Section 144

justice. Considering the above facts and circumstances, we condone the delay of 201 days in filing the present Appeal. 6. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 30/12/2019 u/s 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. The Assessee preferred an Appeal 3 Mr.Javed Mohammad