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.

15 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 148clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai738Mumbai722Delhi513Kolkata460Ahmedabad336Bangalore280Pune270Hyderabad259Jaipur255Surat220Indore145Karnataka141Chandigarh138Amritsar108Visakhapatnam93Rajkot91Lucknow90Cochin83Patna79Nagpur57Raipur52Calcutta46Panaji44Cuttack42Agra38Jabalpur31Guwahati25Allahabad20Dehradun15Varanasi14SC9Jodhpur8Telangana8Ranchi7Punjab & Haryana2Himachal Pradesh2Orissa2Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 14826Section 8013Section 14712Section 143(3)12Section 80I8Condonation of Delay7Natural Justice6Deduction5Limitation/Time-bar

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

5
Section 1444
Section 104
Section 148A4

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

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

148 of the Act. • The SLP filed by the assessee against the decision of the Delhi High Court was dismissed recording: "In the peculiar facts of this case, we are convinced that wrong name given in the notice was merely a clerical error which could be corrected under Section 292B of Act 1961"; • Subsequently, various High Courts, including the Delhi

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

148 of the Act. • The SLP filed by the assessee against the decision of the Delhi High Court was dismissed recording: "In the peculiar facts of this case, we are convinced that wrong name given in the notice was merely a clerical error which could be corrected under Section 292B of Act 1961"; • Subsequently, various High Courts, including the Delhi

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

148, return of income was filed on 19.05.2023 by the assessee. Notices under Section 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

PANDITWARI SADHAN SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 87/DDN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 69

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. The case of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 was sought to be re-opened by the Learned AO vide issuance of notice under section 148

PANDITWARI SADHAN SAHKARI SAMITI LIMITED,DEHRADUN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DEHRADUN

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

ITA 88/DDN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)Section 69

condone the delay and admit the appeals for adjudication. 3. The case of the assessee for the assessment year 2017-18 was sought to be re-opened by the Learned AO vide issuance of notice under section 148

SHRI VIBHU GROVER,KOTDWARA vs. PCIT, DEHRADUN

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 110/DDN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun26 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalvibhu Grover, Pcit, M/S Grover Sales Corporation, Dehradun. Garage Road, Kotdwara, Vs. Pauri-246169 Pan:Agdpg5842R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Anil Jain, Adv. Department By Shri S.K. Chaterjee, Cit-Dr

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 263

Delay condoned. This special leave petition is misconceived and is completely contrary to the law pertaining to Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The notice under Section 148

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

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 at Rs. 17,08,710/- for Assessment Year

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

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 at Rs. 17,08,710/- for Assessment Year

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

148 of the Act on 25.03.2023 with prior approval of the DCIT, Dehradun. Despite intimation letter dated 17.08.2022, multiple notices under 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

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

148 of the Act on 25.03.2023 with prior approval of the DCIT, Dehradun. Despite intimation letter dated 17.08.2022, multiple notices under 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

MASCOT FASTNERS PRIVATE LIMITED,UTTARAKHAND vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI, -

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed

ITA 46/DDN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun02 Apr 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara(Through Video Conferencing) M/S. Mascot Fastners Pvt. Vs. National Faceless Ltd, Assessment Centre, Plot No. B-155, Eldeco, Sidcul, Delhi Industrial Park, Sitarganj, Udham Singh Nagar, 262 403 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aabcm4504H Assessee By : Shri Atul Ninawat, Partner Revenue By: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18/03/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 02/04/2025

For Appellant: Shri Atul Ninawat, PartnerFor Respondent: Shri A. S. Rana, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 147Section 80Section 80I

condone the delay in the interest of substantial justice and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- M/s. Mascot Fastners Pvt. Ltd “1. The initiation of re-assessment proceedings is bad in law as well as facts of the case and the re-assessment order passed u/s 147 should

NAINITAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,HALDWANI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-1, HALDWANI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 4091/DEL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Oct 2023AY 2009-10
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148

148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 10.12.2018 & 29.07.2016 by the ld. ACIT Circle, Haldwani (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). ITA No. 4091/DDN/2018 2. At the outset, we find the appeal filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2009-10 before us is delayed by 64 days. The registry had issued the defect notice

NAINITAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,HALDWANI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, HALDWANI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 77/DDN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun31 Oct 2023AY 2011-12
Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 148

148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 10.12.2018 & 29.07.2016 by the ld. ACIT Circle, Haldwani (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). ITA No. 4091/DDN/2018 2. At the outset, we find the appeal filed by the assessee for A.Y. 2009-10 before us is delayed by 64 days. The registry had issued the defect notice