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.

106 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 3clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,204Mumbai4,127Delhi3,407Kolkata2,214Pune1,828Bangalore1,694Ahmedabad1,400Hyderabad1,222Jaipur926Patna755Surat646Chandigarh577Indore535Nagpur511Cochin468Lucknow422Raipur411Visakhapatnam394Rajkot351Karnataka322Amritsar314Cuttack287Calcutta225Panaji175Agra169Dehradun106Guwahati106Jabalpur87Jodhpur84Allahabad73SC63Telangana62Ranchi61Varanasi38Kerala24Andhra Pradesh21Orissa12Rajasthan11Punjab & Haryana9Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 234E161Section 200A134Condonation of Delay37Addition to Income35Section 143(3)29Section 1028Section 14727Section 14826Section 10(46)

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

3. 'Every day's delay must be explained' does not mean that a pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational common sense pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred

Showing 1–20 of 106 · Page 1 of 6

25
Section 14422
TDS20
Natural Justice17

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

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

3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not mean that pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational, common sense and pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves

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

3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not mean that pedantic approach should be made. Why not every hour's delay, every second's delay? The doctrine must be applied in a rational, common sense and pragmatic manner. 4. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves

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

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

3. On hearing on the delay in filing the Appeal and for the reasons stated in the affidavit for condonation of delay, delay of 167 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 15/12/2018 under 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

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

condone the delay of 201 days in filing the present Appeal. 3 Haseen vs. ITO 6. Brief facts of the case are on merit are that, an assessment order came to be passed on 22/03/2022 u/s 147 r.w. S 144 read with Section

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

Section 253(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” 3. After considering the facts and the prayer of the assessee, we find that there was bonafide and sufficient reason regarding delay in filing the appeal. Under these circumstance and by respectfully following the judgement of hon’ble supreme court relied upon by the assessee, the delay is condoned

WEATHERFORD ASIA PACIFIC PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, CYPRUS

Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial

ITA 5405/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Mar 2025AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2004-05 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Adit/Ddit, Weatherford Asia Pacific Pvt. Ltd., International Taxation, C/O- C & C Associates, 101 New Delhi Nilgiri Apartments, 9, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2006-07 Adit/Ddit, Vs. Weatherford Asia Pacific International Taxation, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi C/O- S.R. Batliboi & Co., Golf View, Corporate Tower-B, Sector-42, Sector Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Department By Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 3Section 4

3 of 2020 will not be applicable. 7. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration to be filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall

ADIT, DEHRADUN vs. WEATHERFORD ASIA PACIFIC LTD., GURGAON

Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial

ITA 1138/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2004-05 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Adit/Ddit, Weatherford Asia Pacific Pvt. Ltd., International Taxation, C/O- C & C Associates, 101 New Delhi Nilgiri Apartments, 9, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2006-07 Adit/Ddit, Vs. Weatherford Asia Pacific International Taxation, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi C/O- S.R. Batliboi & Co., Golf View, Corporate Tower-B, Sector-42, Sector Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Department By Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 3Section 4

3 of 2020 will not be applicable. 7. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration to be filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall

WEATHERFORD ASIA PACIFIC PTE. LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, DEHRADUN

Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial

ITA 498/DEL/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Mar 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2004-05 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Adit/Ddit, Weatherford Asia Pacific Pvt. Ltd., International Taxation, C/O- C & C Associates, 101 New Delhi Nilgiri Apartments, 9, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2006-07 Adit/Ddit, Vs. Weatherford Asia Pacific International Taxation, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi C/O- S.R. Batliboi & Co., Golf View, Corporate Tower-B, Sector-42, Sector Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Department By Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 3Section 4

3 of 2020 will not be applicable. 7. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration to be filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall

WEATHERFORD ASIA PACIFIC PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DDIT, DEHRADUN

Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial

ITA 1617/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Mar 2025AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2004-05 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Adit/Ddit, Weatherford Asia Pacific Pvt. Ltd., International Taxation, C/O- C & C Associates, 101 New Delhi Nilgiri Apartments, 9, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2006-07 Adit/Ddit, Vs. Weatherford Asia Pacific International Taxation, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi C/O- S.R. Batliboi & Co., Golf View, Corporate Tower-B, Sector-42, Sector Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Department By Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 3Section 4

3 of 2020 will not be applicable. 7. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration to be filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall

WEATHERFORD ASIA PACIFIC PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT, NEW DELHI

Appeal stands disposed of with the aforementioned liberty and consequently, the Substantial

ITA 5311/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Dehradun20 Mar 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri M. Balaganeshassessment Year: 2004-05 With Assessment Year: 2006-07 With Assessment Year: 2007-08 With Assessment Year: 2008-09 Vs. Adit/Ddit, Weatherford Asia Pacific Pvt. Ltd., International Taxation, C/O- C & C Associates, 101 New Delhi Nilgiri Apartments, 9, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) With Assessment Year: 2006-07 Adit/Ddit, Vs. Weatherford Asia Pacific International Taxation, Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi C/O- S.R. Batliboi & Co., Golf View, Corporate Tower-B, Sector-42, Sector Road, Gurgaon Pan:Aaacw1859Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Amit Arora, Adv. Department By Sh. Mithun Shete, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 2Section 3Section 4

3 of 2020 will not be applicable. 7. As observed, the assessee is given liberty to restore this appeal in the event the ultimate decision to be taken on the declaration to be filed by the assessee under Section 4 of the said Act is not in favour of the assessee. If such a prayer is made, the Registry shall

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)

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 u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order and order of penalty, Assessee preferred two Appeals before

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)

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 u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Aggrieved by the assessment order and order of penalty, Assessee preferred two Appeals before

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 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 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

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