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.

428 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10(26)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi428Chennai402Mumbai386Kolkata221Ahmedabad207Hyderabad200Jaipur200Bangalore158Pune150Chandigarh122Raipur111Indore74Surat73Amritsar62Panaji62Nagpur57Lucknow51Rajkot50SC40Visakhapatnam36Patna27Cuttack26Cochin23Guwahati20Jodhpur11Varanasi8Allahabad7Agra7Jabalpur5Dehradun5Ranchi2A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Addition to Income63Section 153D58Section 14742Section 14838Section 153C38Condonation of Delay31Section 153A30Section 6830Section 132

MR. NIKHIL SAWHNEY,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NOIDA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1249/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarmr. Nikhil Sawhney, Vs. Dcit, 17, Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, New Delhi-11003 Noida (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aaups0222Q

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Harpreet Kaur hansra, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143(3)

delay in filing of appeals for both the years are hereby condoned and taken up for adjudication. 4. The only identical issue to be decided in this appeal is as to whether the ld CIT(A) was justified in confirming the action of the ld AO in not allowing the carry forward of Long Term Capital Loss (LTCL) arising

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

Showing 1–20 of 428 · Page 1 of 22

...
29
Section 143(3)28
Reassessment18
Limitation/Time-bar18
ITA/754/2010
HC Delhi
21 Dec 2012
Section 12ASection 260ASection 263Section 80GSection 80G(5)(vi)

10 of 22 body had colluded or were conniving with each other and using the trust as a platform to advance their nefarious agenda. In such a case the trust would equally be responsible. (c) The facts and the sequence of events right from the beginning disclosed that the trustees or the members of the governing body were not involved

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 2024AY 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

26. The law of limitation is a substantive law and has definite consequences on the rights and obligations of party to arise. These principles should be adhered to and applied appropriately depending upon the facts and circumstances of a given case. Once a valuable right has accrued in favour of one party as a result of failure of the other

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)

section 253(3A) of the Act, the\nlimitation for filing appeal before this Hon'ble Tribunal expire\non 21.02.2015 and therefore, the present accompanying\nappeal is delayed by 1021 days.\n\n4) The matter regarding filing of appeal in the impugned case\nfor AY 2010-11 got missed due to the reason for this omission\nare as follows:-oversight which

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

In the result appeals preferred by the revenue are dismissed and the\ncross objections preferred by the assessee are allowed\nOrder pronounced in open court on 06

ITA 2581/DEL/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2015-16
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

delay condone by the ld. CIT(A) is\nfound to be just and proper so as not to warrant interference. Thus this\nground of appeal preferred by the revenue is found to be devoid of any merit\nand hence dismissed.\n15. The Revenue has further raised grounds in regard to the decision\nmade by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

DCIT, CIRCLE - 19(1), DELHI vs. PC JEWELLER LIMITED, DELHI

In the result appeals preferred by the revenue are dismissed and the\ncross objections preferred by the assessee are allowed\nOrder pronounced in open court on 06

ITA 3084/DEL/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jun 2025AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 35D

delay condone by the ld. CIT(A) is\nfound to be just and proper so as not to warrant interference. Thus this\nground of appeal preferred by the revenue is found to be devoid of any merit\nand hence dismissed.\n15. The Revenue has further raised grounds in regard to the decision\nmade by the Ld. First Appellate Authority

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI vs. VIREET INVESTMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed as boave for statistical purpose

ITA 3010/DEL/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10(38)Section 115J

delay is condoned and the appeal is being decided on merit. Disallowance of claim of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. 4. The Ld. AO, holding that the assessee has failed to demonstrate that the said share on whose transfer the LTCG derived were equity share and units of mutual fund were of equity

ADDI CHARITABLE TRUST,NEW DELHI vs. CIT EXEMPTION, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is partly allowed as boave for statistical purpose

ITA 3010/DEL/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jan 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S. & Shri Avdhesh Kumar Mishra

Section 10(38)Section 115J

delay is condoned and the appeal is being decided on merit. Disallowance of claim of exemption under section 10(38) of the Act Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. 4. The Ld. AO, holding that the assessee has failed to demonstrate that the said share on whose transfer the LTCG derived were equity share and units of mutual fund were of equity

FOUNDATION FOR ADVANCEMENT OF MICRO ENTERPRISES,GURUGRAM vs. CIT (EXEMPTIONS), CHANDIGARH

In the result appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statical purpose

ITA 2119/DEL/2024[NOT APPLICABLE]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Oct 2024

Bench: Madhumita Roy & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singhvs. Cit(Exemptions), Foundation For Advancement Of Micro Chandigarh Enterprises, Unit No. 701 To 711, 7Th Floor, Unitech Commercial, Tower 2, Sector-45, Gurugram, Haryana- 122003 Pan :Aadcf6999F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Suresh Wadhwa, Fca Department By Shri Surender Pal, Cit, Dr

Section 10Section 80Section 80GSection 80G(5)(iii)

26 of the compilation wherein para 13 of the said order dated 25.05.2023 states as follows: “13. From the above, it is evident that the activities of the applicant has commenced since FY 2019-20 and the present application filed in Form No.10AB under Clause (i) of first proviso to sub-section (5) of section

SURESH KUMAR,SIRSA vs. ITO TDS, HISAR

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 859/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(7)Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 5

condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The concluding part of the impugned order is reproduced herein below for brevity and ready reference: 8. In the instant case, the appellant filed the appeal against the order U/s 206C(6A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was served upon the appellant on 15-03- 2019. The appeal was required

SURESH KUMAR,SIRSA vs. ITO TDS, HISAR

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 848/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri M. Baranwal, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 206Section 206CSection 206C(7)Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 5

condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The concluding part of the impugned order is reproduced herein below for brevity and ready reference: 8. In the instant case, the appellant filed the appeal against the order U/s 206C(6A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was served upon the appellant on 15-03- 2019. The appeal was required

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

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

GD FOODS AND MANUFACTURING (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 26, NEW DELHI

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

ITA 221/DEL/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2023AY 2019-20
Section 10Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36(1)(va)Section 4Section 43B

26,42,189/- (Employee’s Contribution) and profit on sale of fixed asset of Rs. 2,066/-. Aggrieved by intimation dated 09/07/2020, the assessee preferred an Appeal before the CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 22/12/2022 upheld the disallowance on account of late payment of ESI of Rs. Page 3 of 8 GD Foods and Manufacturing (India

MAA SHARDA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GHAZIABAD vs. ADDL. CIT, RANGE- 1,, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3886/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Delhi12 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3886/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 3887/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Maa Sharda Educational Society, Vs Addl. Cit, Akhilesh Kumar, Adv., Chamber Range-1, No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Ghaziabad Rdc Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad Dcit, Circle-1, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtm9201E Assessee By: Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Revenue By: Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing:09.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.04.2022

For Appellant: Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 292B

26[(ba) the person in receipt of the income has furnished the return of income for the previous year in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (4A) of section.] (c) [***] (2) Where an application has been made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in relation

MAA SHARDA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,GHAZIABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE- 1, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 3887/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: HeardITAT Delhi12 Apr 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. A. D. Jaindr. B. R. R. Kumarita No. 3886/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Ita No. 3887/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Maa Sharda Educational Society, Vs Addl. Cit, Akhilesh Kumar, Adv., Chamber Range-1, No. 206-207, Ansal Satyam, Ghaziabad Rdc Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad Dcit, Circle-1, Ghaziabad (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabtm9201E Assessee By: Akhilesh Kumar, Adv. Revenue By: Ms. Sarita Kumari, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing:09.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.04.2022

For Appellant: Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT DR
Section 10Section 11Section 11(1)(d)Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 263Section 292B

26[(ba) the person in receipt of the income has furnished the return of income for the previous year in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (4A) of section.] (c) [***] (2) Where an application has been made on or after the 1st day of June, 2007, the provisions of sections 11 and 12 shall apply in relation

KWORKS TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 5773/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalkworks Technologies Private Dcit, Limited, 30Th Floor, M3M Circle 1(1), International Financial Centre, Vs. Gurgaon, Tower-1, Golf Course Extensions Haryana Road, Sector 66, Badshapur, Haryana -122101. Pan-Aajck0865H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

condone the delay in filing Form 10-IC and accept the said Form 10-IC. The respondent concerned is further directed to provide consequential relief to the petitioner by recomputing its tax liability on the submission of its ITR by taking into account Form 10-IC. 22. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.” 11. The Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi

KN SUPPORT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,GURGAON vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, GURGAON

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5774/DEL/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sudhir Kumar & Shri Manish Agarwalkn Support Services Pvt.Ltd., Dcit, 30Th Floor, M3M International Circle 1(1), Financial Centre, Tower-1, Vs. Gurgaon, Golf Course Extensions Road, Haryana Sector 66, Badshapur, Haryana -122101. Pan-Aajck0720B (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115Section 115BSection 115JSection 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

condone the delay in filing Form 10-IC and accept the said Form 10-IC. The respondent concerned is further directed to provide consequential relief to the petitioner by recomputing its tax liability on the submission of its ITR by taking into account Form 10-IC. 22. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.” 11. The Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi

MEDSAVE HEALTH INSURANCE TPA LIMITED ,DELHI vs. ACIT,CPC TDS, GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 1016/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: HeardITAT Delhi29 Mar 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Arvind Bansal, Ld. Sr. DR
Section 154Section 194Section 194JSection 200ASection 201Section 250Section 271C

10 months 17 days 2017-18 21.09.2017 13.01.2021 3 years 3 months 23 days 2018-19 18.11.2018 13.01.2021 2 years 1 month 26 days 2019-20 07.11.2019 13.01.2021 1 year 2 months 6 days 8.1 The Assessee before the ld. Commissioner for condonation of delay claimed as under:- "In respect of above, it is submitted as under

SUPERTECH EV LIMITED,JHAJJAR vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD, ROHTAK

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6603/DEL/2025[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2026AY 2024-25

Bench: Sh. S. Rifaur Rahman & Sh. Sudhir Kumarassessment Year: 2024-25 Supertech Ev Limited Vs. Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru/ Ito Plot No.150 Sector 16 Exemptions Ward Rohtak Phase 1 Bahadurgarh Jhajjar Haryana-124507 Pan No.Abjcs1671E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115BSection 143(1)Section 154Section 234B

condone the delay in filing Form 10-IC and accept the said Form 10-IC. The respondent concerned is further directed to provide consequential relief to the petitioner by recomputing its tax liability on the submission of its ITR by taking into account Form 10-IC. 22. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.” 11. The Co-ordinate Bench of Delhi