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.

1,145 results for “condonation of delay”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,520Mumbai1,223Delhi1,145Ahmedabad700Kolkata690Pune682Bangalore513Jaipur437Hyderabad398Chandigarh294Nagpur232Cuttack185Visakhapatnam163Cochin162Lucknow155Surat132Karnataka130Amritsar119Indore112Raipur96Rajkot93Calcutta76Guwahati65Panaji56Patna48Agra46SC39Jodhpur33Allahabad29Jabalpur25Dehradun19Varanasi19Ranchi14Telangana13Orissa4Rajasthan3Punjab & Haryana3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Himachal Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Andhra Pradesh1Uttarakhand1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1

Key Topics

Section 234E60Exemption59Section 12A54Section 143(1)51Section 1148Condonation of Delay39Addition to Income36Section 143(3)33Section 14A32

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

ITA - 754 / 2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 260ASection 263Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

Exemptions) under section 263 of the Act. The Tribunal followed its first order dated 06.05.2009 and allowed the appeals of the assessee. In the first order, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to registration under section 12A and section 80G of the Act and that the delay in making the application for such registration was condoned

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

ITA-754/2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12A

Showing 1–20 of 1,145 · Page 1 of 58

...
Section 15426
Section 115B25
Disallowance24
Section 260A
Section 263
Section 80G
Section 80G(5)(vi)

Exemptions) under section 263 of the Act. The Tribunal followed its first order dated 06.05.2009 and allowed the appeals of the assessee. In the first order, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to registration under section 12A and section 80G of the Act and that the delay in making the application for such registration was condoned

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

ITA/754/2010HC Delhi21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 260ASection 263Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

Exemptions) under section 263 of the Act. The Tribunal followed its first order dated 06.05.2009 and allowed the appeals of the assessee. In the first order, the Tribunal held that the assessee was entitled to registration under section 12A and section 80G of the Act and that the delay in making the application for such registration was condoned

B.B. NIGADE AND SONS AND UMA CONSTRUCTIONS JV,KOLHAPUR vs. TDS GHAZIABAD, TDS CPC GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 4435/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.4435/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 बनाम B.B.Nigade & Sons & Uma Tds, Cpc Aaykar Bhawan, Constructions Jv, Vs. Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, H.No.157A Nirmitee Bungalow, U.P. Plot No.64, Vaibhav Housing Soc., Ujalaiwadi, Kolhapur, Maharashtra. Pan No.Aabfb4721A अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 249(3)Section 250

delay is not condonable simply because the assessee has given some general reasons for the same. In this regard a Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Liberal Association for Movement of People Vs. CIT(Exemptions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CR BUILDING vs. PC JEWELLER LIMITED, DELHI

ITA 2581/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Madhumita Roy & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

condoning the delay of 1537 days without any reasonable cause? The facts of the cases are that the assessee is a public limited company engaged in the business of manufacturing and trading of jewellery. It has filed his return of income for Assessment Year 2015-16 on 30.11.2015 declaring total income at ₹4,22,28,69,410/-under the normal

A2Z WASTE MANAGEMENT (BADAUN) LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are all dismissed

ITA 4442/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4441 To 4445/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम A2Z Waste Management (Badaun) Ltd. Deputy/Assistant O-116, 1St Floor, Dlf Shopping Mall, Vs. Commisioner Of Income Tax Arjun Marg, Dlf City Phase-1, (Tds), Dlf Qe S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana, India. Cpc, Aayakar Bhawan, Pan No.Rtka06546B Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 200ASection 249(3)Section 250

delay is not condonable simply because the assessee has given some general reasons for the same. In this regard a Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Liberal Association for Movement of People Vs. CIT(Exemptions

A2Z WASTE MANAGEMENT (BADAUN) LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are all dismissed

ITA 4443/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4441 To 4445/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम A2Z Waste Management (Badaun) Ltd. Deputy/Assistant O-116, 1St Floor, Dlf Shopping Mall, Vs. Commisioner Of Income Tax Arjun Marg, Dlf City Phase-1, (Tds), Dlf Qe S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana, India. Cpc, Aayakar Bhawan, Pan No.Rtka06546B Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 200ASection 249(3)Section 250

delay is not condonable simply because the assessee has given some general reasons for the same. In this regard a Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Liberal Association for Movement of People Vs. CIT(Exemptions

A2Z WASTE MANAGEMENT (BADAUN) LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are all dismissed

ITA 4445/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4441 To 4445/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम A2Z Waste Management (Badaun) Ltd. Deputy/Assistant O-116, 1St Floor, Dlf Shopping Mall, Vs. Commisioner Of Income Tax Arjun Marg, Dlf City Phase-1, (Tds), Dlf Qe S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana, India. Cpc, Aayakar Bhawan, Pan No.Rtka06546B Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 200ASection 249(3)Section 250

delay is not condonable simply because the assessee has given some general reasons for the same. In this regard a Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Liberal Association for Movement of People Vs. CIT(Exemptions

A2Z WASTE MANAGEMENT (BADAUN) LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are all dismissed

ITA 4444/DEL/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4441 To 4445/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम A2Z Waste Management (Badaun) Ltd. Deputy/Assistant O-116, 1St Floor, Dlf Shopping Mall, Vs. Commisioner Of Income Tax Arjun Marg, Dlf City Phase-1, (Tds), Dlf Qe S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana, India. Cpc, Aayakar Bhawan, Pan No.Rtka06546B Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 200ASection 249(3)Section 250

delay is not condonable simply because the assessee has given some general reasons for the same. In this regard a Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Liberal Association for Movement of People Vs. CIT(Exemptions

A2Z WASTE MANAGEMENT (BADAUN) LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY/ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the Assessee are all dismissed

ITA 4441/DEL/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Dec 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrimahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shrisanjay Awasthiआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A Nos.4441 To 4445/Del/2025 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 बनाम A2Z Waste Management (Badaun) Ltd. Deputy/Assistant O-116, 1St Floor, Dlf Shopping Mall, Vs. Commisioner Of Income Tax Arjun Marg, Dlf City Phase-1, (Tds), Dlf Qe S.O. Gurgaon, Haryana, India. Cpc, Aayakar Bhawan, Pan No.Rtka06546B Sector-3, Vaishali, Ghaziabad, U.P. अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 200ASection 249(3)Section 250

delay is not condonable simply because the assessee has given some general reasons for the same. In this regard a Coordinate Bench decision in the case of Liberal Association for Movement of People Vs. CIT(Exemptions

SHAHEED BISHAN SINGH MEMORIAL SENIOR SECONDARY SCHOOL,MANSAROVER GARDEN, NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD EXEMPTION 2(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 180/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Shaheed Bishan Singh Memorial Vs Ito, Senior Secondary School, Ward(Exemption)-2(1), F-213, Mansarover Garden, New Delhi. New Delhi-110015. Pan-Aacts8314D Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Kurshid Ahmed, Adv. Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 29.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.05.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld.Cit(A)/Addl/Jcit(A), Madurai Dated 30.12.2023 For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12A

Exemption) who is empowered for condoning such delay. He contended that the Competent Authority has now condoned the delay in filing

MANASBAL TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 5469/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Apr 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Ms. Vasanti Patel, Advocate and Shri Mahender Goel, Chartered AccountantFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

Exemption) for condonation of delay in filing the Audit Report in Form No. 10-B. Accordingly, the Appellant had filed

SRD MANAGEMENT COMPANY,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 1237/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr. B.R.R.Kumar[Assessment Year : 2012-13] Srd Management Company, Vs Dcit, 304, 3Rd Floor, 44 Deenar Circle-22(2), Bhawan, Nehru Place, New Delhi. New Delhi-110019. Pan-Aamcs3799K Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Bawa Kanwarjit Singh, Ca Respondent By Shri Om Parkash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 01.08.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 07.08.2023

condonation of delay is not a matter of right. Court has to exercise the discretionary Jurisdiction. 6 Whether the inordinate delay was not due to negligence and inaction on the part of the appellant?] Reference is also made to the decision in the case of Agricultural Market Committee vs. ADIT (Exemptions

BAGWANT KISHORE MEMORIAL EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,DELHI vs. ITO,WARD EXEMPTION 1(3), DELHI

In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3657/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr.DR
Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 119Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

condone the delay in question. It is established by law that the requirement of filing Audit Report in Form 10B is procedural in nature and therefore exemption

DELHI AGROHA VIKAS TRUST,DELHI vs. CIT(E) DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 9348/DEL/2019[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2020

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 253(5)Section 80G

condoned the delay in filing these appeals and the parties were asked to argue on the merit of the appeals. 6. We have heard argument of the parties on the merit of the issues in the appeals. We find that in the impugned orders, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected registration under section 12AA and exemption

DELHI AGROHA VIKAS TRUST,DELHI vs. CIT(E) DELHI, DELHI

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

ITA 9349/DEL/2019[-]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Sept 2020

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri O. P. Kant

For Appellant: Sh. V. K. Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT(DR)
Section 12ASection 253(5)Section 80G

condoned the delay in filing these appeals and the parties were asked to argue on the merit of the appeals. 6. We have heard argument of the parties on the merit of the issues in the appeals. We find that in the impugned orders, the Ld. CIT(E) has rejected registration under section 12AA and exemption

MANTOLA CO-OPERATIVE THRIFT & CREDIT SOCIETY LTD vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX- 21,

The appeals are allowed in the above terms

ITA/128/2017HC Delhi07 Mar 2017

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI

Section 80PSection 80P(2)(d)

delay is condoned. The applications stand disposed off. ITA Nos. 128/2017, 129/2017, 130/2017, 131/2017, 132/2017, 133/2017 & 134/2017 3. Issue notice. ITA 128/2017 & Connected matters Page 1 of 4 4. Ms. Vibhooti Malhotra accepts notice for the respondents. 5. The question urged by the assessee is whether the impugned order of the ITAT to the extent it disallowed the deduction claimed

ASIAN RESOURCES LIMITED,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 3(3), INCOME TAX OFFICER

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

ITA 2525/DEL/2025[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Manish Agarwalasian Resources Limited Vs Income Tax Officer M-116A, Iind Floor, Ward 3(3) Connaught Place, New Delhi Room No. 392, Central Pan: Aahca0844Q Revenue Building, I. P. Estate, New Delhi Appellant Respondent Assessee By Sh. Mukesh Mittal, Ca Revenue By Sh. Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 19/11/2025 Date Of Pronouncement 26/11/2025 Order

exempted. The Assessee cannot contend that there is no delay in filing the Appeal when the Assessee himself did not file the application for certified copy of the assessment order on the very same day of passing of the order. In such circumstances, the Assessee shall file application for condonation

PME POWER SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 242/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 249(4)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 276C(2)

condone the delay in removing the defects by the assessee u/s 139(9) and consider such returns as valid. 3. In pending cases as on date, where the defect specified u/s 139(9) of the Act has not been rectified by the assessee, the AD would be required to immediately initiate proceedings under section 144 of the Act by issuing

PME POWER SOLUTIONS INDIA LTD,NEW DELHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed

ITA 249/DEL/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(9)Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 249(4)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 276C(2)

condone the delay in removing the defects by the assessee u/s 139(9) and consider such returns as valid. 3. In pending cases as on date, where the defect specified u/s 139(9) of the Act has not been rectified by the assessee, the AD would be required to immediately initiate proceedings under section 144 of the Act by issuing