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.

1,317 results for “condonation of delay”+ Natural Justiceclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,760Mumbai1,641Delhi1,317Kolkata849Ahmedabad757Bangalore737Pune650Jaipur533Hyderabad501Chandigarh327Patna301Surat288Indore280Raipur278Visakhapatnam236Amritsar233Lucknow207Karnataka199Cuttack197Rajkot185Nagpur171Agra161Panaji157Cochin146Calcutta82Jodhpur58Guwahati50Dehradun43Jabalpur36Allahabad32Ranchi28SC24Telangana22Varanasi20Rajasthan6Kerala5Himachal Pradesh4Orissa4Andhra Pradesh2DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income58Condonation of Delay44Natural Justice43Section 153C38Section 14735Section 143(3)33Section 143(1)28Section 115B28Section 148

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL)-2 vs. VERSATILE POLYTECH PVT. LTD.

Appeals are dismissed as time barred

ITA/371/2022HC Delhi12 Dec 2023

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

Section 260ASection 5

justice and the court should adopt a liberal approach and the delay resulting from official procedures should normally be condoned. This court rejected the argument, placing reliance on the judgment in the case of P.K. Ramachandran (supra) and observed that although the provisions under Section 5 Limitation Act have to receive liberal construction, but the court cannot ignore the fact

ACIT, CC-14, DELHI vs. LAKSHYA CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 181/DEL/2021[2005-06]Status: HeardITAT Delhi22 Jan 2024

Showing 1–20 of 1,317 · Page 1 of 66

...
28
Section 14425
Limitation/Time-bar22
Section 142(1)20
AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

For Appellant: Shri Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri Subhra Jyoti Chakraborty, CIT- DR
Section 153ASection 253Section 5

justice and the court should adopt a liberal approach and the delay resulting from official Digitally Signed ITA 401/2023 Page 7 of 15 pages procedures should normally be condoned. This court rejected the argument, placing reliance on the judgment in the case of P.K. Ramachandran (supra) and observed that although the provisions under Section 5 Limitation Act have to receive

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result ITA No. 1364/Del/2012 for AY 2007-08 filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1364/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Feb 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Kirshnan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rachna Singh, CIT DR

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. In the present case following the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court we are of the view that delay in filing appeal by the revenue needs to be condoned

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SUR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

ITA 6174/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2021AY 2009-10
Section 147Section 148Section 68

Justice and fair play, the delay needs to be condoned. The bona fide of the reasons have not been assailed by the other side and, therefore, we condone the delay caused in the filing of the Cross Objections before the Tribunal in case of ACIT CC-3 vs M/s Goldstar Cement Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 6177/Del/2013

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. BBN TRANSPORTATION PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

Appeals are dismissed in favour of the

ITA 6176/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jul 2021AY 2008-09
Section 147Section 148Section 68

Justice and fair play, the delay needs to be condoned. The bona fide of the reasons have not been assailed by the other side and, therefore, we condone the delay caused in the filing of the Cross Objections before the Tribunal in case of ACIT CC-3 vs M/s Goldstar Cement Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 6177/Del/2013

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 6, NEW DELHI vs. NEC TECHNOLOGIES INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

The appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed\nas time barred

ITA 7392/DEL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jul 2025AY 2010-11
Section 143Section 144C(5)Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

nature before various judicial\nforums, and in such circumstances the matter regarding filing of\nappeal in the impugned case for A.Y. 2010-11 got missed due to\noversight which was an inadvertent omission. It is strange that\nPage 11 of 24\n\nITA No.- 7392/Del/2017\nM/s NEC Technologies India Pvt. Ltd.\n\nimmense workload of time barring assessment caused

DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX vs. VISHWA JAGRITI MISSION

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

JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J. These are nine appeals, all filed by Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟, for short). Two substantial 2012:DHC:7652-DB ITA Nos.754/2010, 773/2010, 775/2010, 1092/2010, 1101/2010, 1103/2010, 1104/2010, 1112/2010 & 1124/2010 Page 2 of 22 questions of law were framed by this Court

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

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

JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J. These are nine appeals, all filed by Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟, for short). Two substantial 2012:DHC:7652-DB ITA Nos.754/2010, 773/2010, 775/2010, 1092/2010, 1101/2010, 1103/2010, 1104/2010, 1112/2010 & 1124/2010 Page 2 of 22 questions of law were framed by this Court

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

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

JUSTICE R.V. EASWAR R.V. EASWAR, J. These are nine appeals, all filed by Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟, for short). Two substantial 2012:DHC:7652-DB ITA Nos.754/2010, 773/2010, 775/2010, 1092/2010, 1101/2010, 1103/2010, 1104/2010, 1112/2010 & 1124/2010 Page 2 of 22 questions of law were framed by this Court

SH. RAJ KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-34(5), DELHI

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

ITA 3670/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(3)Section 271A

condonation of delay in filing of these two appeals" is not based on correct appreciation of facts on record and therefore unsustainable. 2.2That conclusion of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi that "accordingly, appellant's all grounds of appeal are dismissed as not maintainable and thereby appellant two appeals

SH. RAJ KUMAR CHAUDHARY,DELHI vs. ITO WARD-34(5), DELHI

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

ITA 3671/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue [Assessment Year: 2018-19] Shri Raj Kumar Chaudhary, Income Tax Officer, C-243, Sector-3, Dsidc Ward-34(5), Indl. Area Bawana, Vs Delhi. New Delhi-11003. Pan- Aewpk1980K Assessee Revenue

Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(3)Section 271A

condonation of delay in filing of these two appeals" is not based on correct appreciation of facts on record and therefore unsustainable. 2.2That conclusion of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), New Delhi that "accordingly, appellant's all grounds of appeal are dismissed as not maintainable and thereby appellant two appeals

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 the reasons and the epidemic conditions prevailing and the Supreme Court ruling for the said period and the facts on record and without giving an adequate opportunity, done hastily and by not observing the principles of natural justice

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. SHINE STAR BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 3456/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that

M/S KING BUILDCON (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 3081/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that

M/S LKG BUILDERS (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 6356/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that

M/S LKG BUILDERS (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 6354/DEL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that

M/S LKG BUILDERS (P) LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 6353/DEL/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. KING BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 3501/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S KING BUILDCON PVT. LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 3460/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. M.M. BUILDCON PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Assessee allowed and appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 3449/DEL/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2020AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

justice, condoned the delay in filing the appeal. 7. The assessee further raised issue of jurisdiction of the A.O. to proceed under section 153A of the Income Tax Act in respect of the year under consideration as no incriminating documents, assets had been found as a result of search on assessee. The assessee submitted before the Ld. CIT(A) that