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.

110 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 2clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,206Mumbai4,130Delhi3,405Kolkata2,219Pune1,867Bangalore1,698Ahmedabad1,523Hyderabad1,258Jaipur987Patna755Surat659Cochin611Chandigarh584Indore563Nagpur524Visakhapatnam455Lucknow432Raipur411Rajkot357Amritsar331Karnataka329Cuttack316Calcutta235Panaji201Agra173Guwahati123Dehradun110Jodhpur99Jabalpur90Allahabad86SC66Telangana62Ranchi61Varanasi38Andhra Pradesh21Orissa13Rajasthan11Kerala9Punjab & Haryana9Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1Gauhati1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1

Key Topics

Section 234E171Section 200A138Condonation of Delay34Addition to Income33Section 143(3)29Section 20128Section 1028Section 14825Section 10(46)

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

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this, when delay is condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 1. " Any appeal or any application, other than an application under

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 110 · Page 1 of 6

25
Section 14724
TDS22
Natural Justice19
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

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this, when delay is condoned, the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 1. " Any appeal or any application, other than an application under

SURENDRA SINGH,HARIDWAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE, HARIDWAR

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

ITA 3094/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun23 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrir.K. Panda & Shri N. K. Choudhry(Through Video Conferencing) Surendra Singh, Vs. Dcit, Gali No. 1, Subhash Nagar, Circle, Haridwar Jwalapur, Ramesh Varampuram, Hardwar Pan: Barps1918M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Poonam Sharma
Section 144Section 250(6)Section 68Section 69

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. 'Every day's delay must be explained' does not mean

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

Delay condoned. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) passed by the High Court. In view of this, we find no merit in the appeals and special leave petitions. Accordingly, the appeals and special leave petitions are dismissed.” 25. The doctrine of merger results

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

Delay condoned. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the parties. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment(s) passed by the High Court. In view of this, we find no merit in the appeals and special leave petitions. Accordingly, the appeals and special leave petitions are dismissed.” 25. The doctrine of merger results

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

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

2 Haseen vs. ITO 3. Per contra, the Ld. Department's Representative submitted that, there is no sufficient cause to condone the inordinate delay, thus sought for dismissal of the present Appeal on delay in latches. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal

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

2 Sh. Sanjay Kumar Vs. ITO about passing of the order impugned only after approaching another Chartered Accountant and on coming to know belatedly about the passing of the order impugned, immediately the Assessee filed the present Appeal. Thus contended that the delay caused in filing the present Appeal is not intentional and sought for condoning the delay in filing

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

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

2 Sh. Arvind Singh 3. Heard the parties on the delay. For the reason stated in the affidavit for condonation of delay, the delay of 88 days in filing the present Appeal is hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 24/03/2023under Section

PRAVEEN SINGH RANA ,UTTARKASHI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), DELHI (NFAC)

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

ITA 123/DDN/2026[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun15 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S & Shri Sanjay Awasthipraveen Singh Rana Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Nagar Palika Complex, (Appeals)/ National Faceless Neartiloth Pul, Barahat Appeal Centre, Range, Uttarakash Delhi Collectorate, Uttarakhand (Respondent) Pan: Aoopr7186N (Applicant) Appellant By Sh. Pankaj Tiwari, Adv Respondent By Sh. Akash Barnwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 09.04.2026 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 144Section 147

Section 1444B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Aggrieved by the assessment order, Assessee preferred an Appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) with a delay of 425 days in filing the First Appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) vide order impugned dated 26/12/2025, dismissed the First 2 Praveen Singh Rana vs. CIT(A) Appeal

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

2. That an Appeal Order was passed by the NFAC on 26.6.2024 dismissing my Appeal and upholding the Assessment Order passed by Assessing Officer. 3. That I did not receive the Appeal Order on my registered email ID " abhishekagg28@gmail.com" but it was sent to another email ID. 4. That I received a telephonic call from the Inspector

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)

section 11(2) of the Act. Reliance was placed on para nos. 6 to 9 2 of ITA Nos. 882/Del/2024 titled as Earthing Trust Vs. ITO decided on 10.01.2025. 6. Learned Authorized Representative for the Revenue submitted that Ld. JCIT had no powers to condone the delay

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

JASPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD 1(1)(2), DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 268/DDN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 27/02/2024 u/s 147 r.w. Section 144 r.w. Section 1444B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Jaspal Singh Vs. ITO Consequent to the assessment order an order of penalty also came to be passed on 26/08/2024

JASPAL SINGH,DEHRADUN vs. ITO WARD1(1)(2) DEHRADUN, DEHRADUN

In the result, the Appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 269/DDN/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun18 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 144Section 147Section 271(1)(c)

2. Brief facts of the case are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 27/02/2024 u/s 147 r.w. Section 144 r.w. Section 1444B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act' for short) by making certain additions. Jaspal Singh Vs. ITO Consequent to the assessment order an order of penalty also came to be passed on 26/08/2024

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

2 8085083/-, he levied the penalty of Rs. 1 40425/–. The order under section 271B was passed on 28/9/2016. The assessee was aggrieved with the order of the learned assessing officer preferred an appeal before the learned CIT – A who dismissed the appeal of the assessee holding that that the penalty was levied by the learned assessing officer by order

MEENAKSHI KUMAR,DEHRADUN vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN

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

ITA 22/DDN/2020[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun27 Jul 2023AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Through Video Conferencing] [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Meenakshi Kumar, Vs Pr.Cit, C/O-Matta Garg & Co., Dehradun. 15, Astley Hall, Dehradun, Uttarakhand-248001. Pan-Agipk3345G Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri N.S.Jangpangi, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 27.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 27.07.2023 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Pr. Cit-1, Dehradun Dated 09.03.2020. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 54

delay in filing the appeal is hereby, condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing. 7. Facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the assessee e-filed his return of income on 03.02.2016 declaring total income of INR 2,44,310/-. The case was processed u/s 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) accepting

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)

2 Shri Shiv Mandir Vs. ITO 3 Per contra, the ld. Department's Representative submitted that there is no reasonable cause to condone the delay, thus sought for dismissing the Appeal on delay in latches. 4. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record on the issue of delay in filing the present Appeal

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