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.

24 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 142(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai615Kolkata554Delhi495Chennai462Hyderabad389Ahmedabad328Jaipur301Bangalore270Pune265Visakhapatnam164Surat159Indore138Chandigarh127Karnataka104Rajkot101Lucknow97Patna92Amritsar77Cochin62Nagpur60Calcutta48Cuttack44Raipur43Panaji40Agra37Dehradun24Allahabad23Guwahati23Jabalpur18Varanasi15Jodhpur11SC11Telangana9Ranchi7Andhra Pradesh2Orissa2Himachal Pradesh1Kerala1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 234E121Section 200A22Section 14815Section 200A(1)(c)11Section 20011Section 200A(1)11TDS11Section 153A10Condonation of Delay

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,UDHAM SINGH NAGAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

ITA 3/DDN/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pramod Verma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

142(1); (vi) Sixthly, prior to the date on which the jurisdictional notice under Section 143 (2) was issued, the scheme of amalgamation had been approved on 29 January 2013 by the High Court of Delhi under the Companies Act 1956 with effect from 1 April 2012; (vii) Seventhly, the assessing officer assumed jurisdiction to make an assessment in pursuance

Showing 1–20 of 24 · Page 1 of 2

9
Section 808
Addition to Income6
Search & Seizure5

KARAM SAFETY PRIVATE LIMITED,SITARGANJ vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3)(5), UDHAM SINGH NAGAR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of the Stay Applications are dismissed

ITA 24/DDN/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 May 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Pramod Verma, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 80Section 80ISection 92BSection 92C

142(1); (vi) Sixthly, prior to the date on which the jurisdictional notice under Section 143 (2) was issued, the scheme of amalgamation had been approved on 29 January 2013 by the High Court of Delhi under the Companies Act 1956 with effect from 1 April 2012; (vii) Seventhly, the assessing officer assumed jurisdiction to make an assessment in pursuance

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

NANDAN SINGH,PITHORAGARH vs. CIT(A), NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 185/DDN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Apr 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vimal Kumar & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhassessment Year: 2019-20 Nandan Singh, Vs. Cit(Appeals)/National Payya Pauri, Faceless Appeal Pithoragarh Cemtre(Nfac) Assessment Uttarakhand Centre, Pan No. Bfaps4805M Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri SK Ahuja, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amarpal Singh Sr. DR
Section 142Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144B(1)Section 147Section 148

142(1) dated 29.09.2023 and 19.10.2023 were issued but no response was received. Likewise, reminder dated 30.10.2023, show-cause-notice under Section 144B(1) dated 20.11.2023 and notice dated 22.12.2023 under Section 143(2) of the Act were not responded by the assessee. Ld. AO vide order dated 29.12.2023, made the addition of Rs.19,96,881/-. 3. Against assessment order

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 70/DDN/2025[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2011-2012

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69B

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 72/DDN/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2013-2014

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69B

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL & RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DC/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRLCE, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 41/DDN/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2015-2016

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69B

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED ,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE,HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 73/DDN/2025[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2014-2015

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69B

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

SSGR HOSPITAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED,HALDWANI vs. DCIT/ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, HALDWANI, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals of the Assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 71/DDN/2025[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun17 Sept 2025AY 2012-2013

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

Section 132Section 142(1)Section 153ASection 69B

delay of 18 days in filing the Appeals are hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, a search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) was carried out at M/s SSGR Hospital and Research Centre Pvt. Ltd. "Group of cases", Haldwani and other premises

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

Sections 142(1) dated 26.09.2022, 01.11.2022, letter dated 22.12.2022 and show- cause-notices dated 29.12.2022, 15.02.2023, 27.02.2023 and 10.03.2023, no compliance was made by Assessee. Ld. AO passed assessment order dated 14.03.2023. In pursuance to assessment order dated 14.03.2023. Ld. AO passed penalty order dated 05.09.2023. 3. Against assessment order dated 14.03.2023 and penalty order 05.09.2023, the assessee filed applications

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

Sections 142(1) dated 26.09.2022, 01.11.2022, letter dated 22.12.2022 and show- cause-notices dated 29.12.2022, 15.02.2023, 27.02.2023 and 10.03.2023, no compliance was made by Assessee. Ld. AO passed assessment order dated 14.03.2023. In pursuance to assessment order dated 14.03.2023. Ld. AO passed penalty order dated 05.09.2023. 3. Against assessment order dated 14.03.2023 and penalty order 05.09.2023, the assessee filed applications

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), HALDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 211/DDN/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, BIJNOR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A),, HALDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 195/DDN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(A), HALDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 196/DDN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), , HALDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 209/DDN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), HALDEANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 210/DDN/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), HLDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 212/DDN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR RURAL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), HALDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 215/DDN/2019[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR RURAL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), HALDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 216/DDN/2019[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,BIJNOR RURAL vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (A), HALDWANI

In the result, appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 217/DDN/2019[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun28 Feb 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2013-14 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2014-15 With Assessment Year: 2016-17 With Assessment Year: 2015-16 With Assessment Year: 2017-18 With Assessment Year: 2018-19 With Assessment Year: 2019-20

Section 200Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 234E

condone the delay in filing the appeals and admit them for adjudication on merits. As stated earlier, the common dispute in all these appeals relates to levy of fee under section 234E of the Act for default in furnishing Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) statements within the prescribed time limit. 4. Briefly the facts are, while processing TDS statements furnished