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.

60 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai2,611Mumbai2,459Delhi2,221Kolkata1,467Pune1,337Bangalore1,257Hyderabad920Ahmedabad819Jaipur736Surat426Chandigarh418Raipur360Nagpur354Visakhapatnam310Indore303Amritsar271Lucknow271Karnataka254Cochin247Rajkot233Cuttack174Patna152Panaji136Agra79Calcutta67Guwahati66Dehradun60SC56Jodhpur53Allahabad42Telangana38Varanasi32Jabalpur31Ranchi23Rajasthan9Orissa7Kerala7Punjab & Haryana5Himachal Pradesh4Andhra Pradesh3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 200A112Section 234E40Condonation of Delay35Section 1028Section 10(46)25Section 14822Section 153C22Addition to Income21Section 153A

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

ITA 35/DDN/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun29 Apr 2022AY 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

10,23,992/- may kindly be allowed.” 4. We have heard Ld. Counsel for the assessee and also Ld. AR perused the record and gave our thoughtful consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) summarily dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay in latches. The reasons assigned by the assessee for condoning the delay was that ‘due to the ignorance

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

Showing 1–20 of 60 · Page 1 of 3

20
Section 143(3)17
Exemption13
Natural Justice12
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

10,23,992/- may kindly be allowed.” 4. We have heard Ld. Counsel for the assessee and also Ld. AR perused the record and gave our thoughtful consideration. 5. The Ld.CIT(A) summarily dismissed the appeal on the ground of delay in latches. The reasons assigned by the assessee for condoning the delay was that ‘due to the ignorance

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)

section 144 and penalty order u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act respectively for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. In the quantum appeal, the assessee raised following grounds : “1. On facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in condoning the delay of more than 2 years merely on ground that the erstwhile

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1)(3), DEHRADUN, AAYKAR BHAWAN, SUBHASH ROAD, DEHRADUN vs. UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LIMITED, STATION SUB AREA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 92/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Sh. Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Amar Pal Singh, JCIT-DR
Section 10Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 149Section 617

delay of 75 days in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned. 2 Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. 3. Brief facts of the case as mentioned in the order of the ld. CIT(A) are as under: “2. Brief facts of the case: The appellant is a company established under section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956, with

ABHISHEK AGARWAL,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W01(1)(1), DEHRADUN

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

ITA 103/DDN/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalita No.104/Ddn/2025 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Abhishek Agarwal, Income Tax Officer, Near Town Area Office, Ward-1(1)(1), Doiwala, Distt Dehradun, Vs. Dehradun. Uttarakhand-248140. Pan-Alzpa7733L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rajiv Sahni, Ca Department By Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08/09/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 12/09/2025

10. That substantial justice gets dwarfed by the technical consideration if the delay in filing of the Appeal is not condoned. 11. That the delayed filing of the Appeal was not deliberate, or on account of culpable negligence or on account of mala fide intention. 12.That justice can be done only if the matter is fought on merits

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

Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making an addition of Rs. 27,30,000/- u/s 69 of the Act on account of undisclosed investment. Aggrieved by the assessment order dated 15/12/2018, Assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of ‘more than one year’. The Ld. CIT(A) vide

PURAN SINGH NEGI,HALDWANI vs. THE ASSIST COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , NANITAL

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

ITA 33/DDN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun04 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 33/Ddn/2020 (A.Y 2016-17)

Section 2Section 28Section 56

delay in filing the present appeal is condoned. 5 Puran Singh Negi 4. Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee filed return for the Assessment Year 2016-17 declaring NIL income. Subsequently, the assessee has filed revised return declaring total income of Rs. 37,17,350/- (after availing deduction under Chapter VI (A) the revised return was selected

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

5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court time and again clarified that the delay in filing the Appeal with sufficient cause should be looked into in a liberal way and shall condone the delay. In the landmark decision in Collector, Land & Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji& Others (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court settled the law that

SH. NITIN SINGHAL,U.S.NAGAR vs. ITO, U.S.NAGAR

In the result, appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 8/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun08 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwali.T.A. No. 08/Ddn/2024 (A.Y 2015-16) Sh. Nitin Singhal Vs. Ito Matta Garg & Co. Chartered U.S. Nagar Accountants, 15, Astley Hall, Ward-2(2)(4), Bajpur, Dehradun, Uttarakhand Udhamsingh Nagar, Pan: Aqwps4877P Uttarakhand, 262401

Section 263

condone the delay of 777 days in filing the present Appeal. 7. Brief facts of the case are that, return of income was filed declaring total income of Rs. 5,37,830/-. An addition of Rs. 2,25,000/- was made in original order u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) passed

GYANENDRA PANWAR,DEHRADUN vs. ASST. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC BENGALURU, BENGALURU

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 238/DDN/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun11 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shr Sanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.238/Ddn/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2017-18 बनाम Gyanendra Panwar, Assistant Director Of Income Nanda Devi Enclave, Badripur, Vs. Tax, Cpc,Ito,Ward 1(3)(4), Dehradun-248005, Uttarakhand. Aaykar Bhawan, 16, Civil Lines, Pan No.Adipp2853R Near Iit Roorkee, Uttarakhand. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

5. Treatment of Mother: The mother of the appellant, Smt. Savitri Panwar aged 90 years was suffering from cancer of ovary during the period and had undergone treatment in various hospitals from time to time. Unfortunately, she could not survive and passed away on 25.06.2025. In fact, she was even admitted to Himalayan Hospital, Cancer Research Institute, Jolly Grant

SLO AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.,DEHRADUN vs. DCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, Appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 6509/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.Slo Automobiles Private Dy. Cit, Limited, Circle-2, Dehradun. 108-Haridwar Road, Vs. Dehradun-248001. Pan-Aancs8160M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 43B

condone the delay of 197 days in filing the present Appeal. SLO Automobiles Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 5. Brief facts of the case are that, the Assessee filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 6,46,975/- after adjusting the loans of earlier years, NIL taxable income has been reported. During the course of survey conducted by the Commercial

MR. RAKESH SHARMA,DELHI vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 40/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

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

Section 139(1)Section 153C

condoned the delay in filing the appeals and taken them for adjudication. 5. Before us, the Ld. AR of the assessee requested that the Appeal No.39/DDN/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 be taken as a lead case as it contained entire argument put fourth by both the parties before the lower authorities, therefore, we first take up the appeal

MR. RAKESH SHARMA,DELHI vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 38/DDN/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Sept 2025AY 2012-13

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

Section 139(1)Section 153C

condoned the delay in filing the appeals and taken them for adjudication. 5. Before us, the Ld. AR of the assessee requested that the Appeal No.39/DDN/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 be taken as a lead case as it contained entire argument put fourth by both the parties before the lower authorities, therefore, we first take up the appeal

MR. RAKESH SHARMA,DELHI vs. ACIT, DEHRADUN

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 39/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun12 Sept 2025AY 2013-14

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

Section 139(1)Section 153C

condoned the delay in filing the appeals and taken them for adjudication. 5. Before us, the Ld. AR of the assessee requested that the Appeal No.39/DDN/2024 for Assessment Year 2013-14 be taken as a lead case as it contained entire argument put fourth by both the parties before the lower authorities, therefore, we first take up the appeal

M/S UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LIMITED,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 24/DDN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 10Section 158ASection 250

delay in filing the captioned appeals is condoned and the appeals are heard on merits. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in case of the assessee itself in ITA No.725/Del/2017 for AY 2013-14 vide order dated 19.03.2025, the appeal of the assessee was ITA Nos.21 to 24/DDN/2025 dismissed by Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT

M/S UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LIMITED,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 23/DDN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 10Section 158ASection 250

delay in filing the captioned appeals is condoned and the appeals are heard on merits. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in case of the assessee itself in ITA No.725/Del/2017 for AY 2013-14 vide order dated 19.03.2025, the appeal of the assessee was ITA Nos.21 to 24/DDN/2025 dismissed by Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT

MS UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LITD.,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 22/DDN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 10Section 158ASection 250

delay in filing the captioned appeals is condoned and the appeals are heard on merits. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in case of the assessee itself in ITA No.725/Del/2017 for AY 2013-14 vide order dated 19.03.2025, the appeal of the assessee was ITA Nos.21 to 24/DDN/2025 dismissed by Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT

M/S. UTTARAKHAND PURV SAINIK KALYAN NIGAM LTD. ,DEHRADUN vs. ITO, W-1(1)(3), DDN, DEHRADUN

In the result, captioned appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 21/DDN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar Us & Shri Manish Agarwal

Section 10Section 158ASection 250

delay in filing the captioned appeals is condoned and the appeals are heard on merits. 5. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that in case of the assessee itself in ITA No.725/Del/2017 for AY 2013-14 vide order dated 19.03.2025, the appeal of the assessee was ITA Nos.21 to 24/DDN/2025 dismissed by Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT

SH. ARVIND SINGH ,RISHIKESH vs. ITO, RISHIKESH, RISHIKESH

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

ITA 183/DDN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun09 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

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

Section 144BSection 147

10, Dhalwala, Munikrieti, Uttarakhand Rishikesh, District TehriUttarakhand PAN: BWRPS3145N Appellant Respondent Assessee by Sh. K. K. Juneja, Adv Revenue by Sh. A. S. Rana, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 09/07/2025 Date of Pronouncement 09/07/2025 ORDER PER YOGESH KUMAR, U.S. JM: The present appeal is filed by the Assessee against the order of CIT(A)/National Faceless Appeal Centre

SWAMI SATYAPRAKASHNAND SHIV MANDIR TRUST,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. AO (EXEMPTION), DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee is allowed

ITA 93/DDN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Apr 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2022-23 Swami Satyaprakashanand Vs. Income Tax Officer, Shiv Mandir Trust, Kali Kotdwar Mandir, Bareilley Haldwani (Uttrakhand) Bye Pass Road, Kishanpur, Udham Singh Nagar Uttarakhand Pin: 263148 Pan No. Aants6873L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. Sampath, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)

condone the delay in filing Form 10. 7. From examination of record, in light of aforesaid rival submission, it is crystal clear that appellant/assessee filed return of income for assessment year 2022-23 on 16.08.2022 wherein assessee claimed exemption under Section 11 of the Act. The Trust had accumulated or set apart Rs.62,00,000/- for next year under Rule