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.

90 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai96Delhi90Mumbai76Kolkata55Ahmedabad50Raipur44Bangalore44Pune36Hyderabad35Jaipur34Surat12Visakhapatnam11Rajkot8Chandigarh6Lucknow5Nagpur4Indore4Agra3Cuttack3Jodhpur3Amritsar3Guwahati3Calcutta2Telangana2Patna2Karnataka2Cochin1Jabalpur1Orissa1SC1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 234E100Section 15499Section 200A75Section 12A67Section 80I45Section 10A39Section 80G33Addition to Income27Rectification u/s 15427

M/S. GHAZIABAD DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,NEW DELHI vs. CIT, GHAZIABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 455/DEL/2016[]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2016

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaghaziabad Development Authority Vs Commissioner Of Income C/O M/S Rra Tax India, Tax, D-28, South Extension, Part-1, Ghaziabad. New Delhi. Aaalg0072C

Section 12ASection 12A(1)Section 154

condone the delay of 1875 days and admit the appeal. 5.4 As far as the merits of the appeal are concerned, it is seen that according to the newly introduced provisions of section 12AA of the Act the person in receipt of the income should make an application in Form No. 10A

PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX vs. E-FUNDS INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT. LTD.

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/608/2015

Showing 1–20 of 90 · Page 1 of 5

Deduction26
Section 10B25
TDS25
HC Delhi
06 Oct 2015
Section 10ASection 115Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 80Section 80H

delay in re-filing the respective appeals is condoned. 2. The applications are disposed of. ITA No. 607/2015 & 608/2015 3. These two appeals by the Revenue are under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟). 4. At the outset, Mr. Kamal Sawhney, learned Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue states that page 6 of the memorandum of appeal

PR. COMMISSIONER OFINCOME TAX vs. E-FUNDS INTERNATIONAL INDIA PVT. LTD.

The appeals are dismissed

ITA/607/2015HC Delhi06 Oct 2015
Section 10ASection 115Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 260ASection 80Section 80H

delay in re-filing the respective appeals is condoned. 2. The applications are disposed of. ITA No. 607/2015 & 608/2015 3. These two appeals by the Revenue are under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 („Act‟). 4. At the outset, Mr. Kamal Sawhney, learned Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue states that page 6 of the memorandum of appeal

CANON INDIA PVT. LTD,GURUGRAM vs. NEAC, DELHI

In the result, to sum up and conclude:

ITA 585/DEL/2021[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 254Section 92C

Section 10A and the set-off of brought-forward losses, hence, there was no Indian tax liability against which the foreign taxes withheld in Japan can be credited. 14. We find that while the Mumbai Tribunal in the Bank of India case grappled with the question of following a non-jurisdictional High Court being not binding judicial precedent, and arrived

DCIT CIRCLE 4(2), NEW DELHI vs. CANON INDIA PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, to sum up and conclude:

ITA 1038/DEL/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Vijay B. Basanta, CIT-DR
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 254Section 92C

Section 10A and the set-off of brought-forward losses, hence, there was no Indian tax liability against which the foreign taxes withheld in Japan can be credited. 14. We find that while the Mumbai Tribunal in the Bank of India case grappled with the question of following a non-jurisdictional High Court being not binding judicial precedent, and arrived

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BENGALURU-5, BENGALURU vs. M/S NTT DATA GLOBAL DELIVERY SERVICES LTD.

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA - 392 / 2022HC Delhi12 Oct 2022

Bench: The Supreme Court & The Said Issue Is Pending Adjudication In Civil Appeal No.9175 Of 2018. 4. Having Heard Learned Counsel For The Appellant, This Court Finds That The Issue Raised In The Present Appeal Is No Longer Res Integra. In Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1 Vs. American Express India Pvt. Ltd.

Section 10Section 10ASection 10BSection 80ASection 80I

delay in re- filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. ITA No.392/2022 1. Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 20th December, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA No.5196/Del./2014 for the Assessment Year 2009-10. 2022:DHC:4235-DB ITA No.392/2022 Page

PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BENGALURU-5, BENGALURU vs. M/S NTT DATA GLOBAL DELIVERY SERVICES LTD.

Accordingly, the same is dismissed

ITA/392/2022HC Delhi12 Oct 2022

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

Section 10Section 10ASection 10BSection 80ASection 80I

delay in re- filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. ITA No.392/2022 1. Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challenging the order dated 20th December, 2018 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA No.5196/Del./2014 for the Assessment Year 2009-10. This is a digitally signed Judgement. NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/004235

APTIVE COMPONENTS INDIA P.LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS M/S DELPHI AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS PVT. LTD.),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE-3(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the assessee in respect of ground no

ITA 1129/DEL/2020[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Dec 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year: 2005-06] M/S Aptiv Components India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax, (Formerly Known As M/S Delphi Vs Circle-3(1), Automotive Systems Pvt. Ltd.) Room No.-380B, C.R. Building P-24, Green Part Extn., Delhi- I.P. Estate, 110016. Delhi-110002. Pan- Aaacd0226E Assessee Revenue

Section 10ASection 143(3)

Delay condoned. 2. We have heard Mr. Dhruv Agarwal, learned Senior counsel appearing for the Petitioner-Department. 3. The issue is whether claim of certain expenses are to be taken into account to claim statutory disallowance under section 40(a) of the Income-tax Act. 4. The said issued is covered in the Judgment of this Court

M/S PADM SERVICES,RANIPUR vs. ITO, HARIDWAR

In the result, we dispose off the appeal of the assessee dismissing ground

ITA 5532/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishim/S. Padm Services, Vs. Ito, Plot No. 27, Sector-1B, Iie Sidcul, Ward-2, Ranipur, Haridwar Pan:Aajfp4857F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. Shankarsh, CAFor Respondent: Sh. FR Meena, Sr. DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 2Section 80ASection 80I

condone the delay, therefore, apparently the deduction is not eligible if the return is not filed in time. The Special Bench in case of Saffire Garments Vs ITO 140 ITD 6 (Rajkot) (Special Bench) has also decided similar issue. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Nath Brothers Exim International Ltd. Vs. Union of India 80 Taxmann.com

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

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1248/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Aug 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishimr. Nikhil Sawhney Acit, 17 – Sunder Nagar, Central Circle, Vs. New Delhi – 110 003. Noida. Pan: Aaups0222Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rakhi Vimal, Sr. DR
Section 10(38)Section 143

condone the delay admitting the appeal of the assessee and proceed to decide the issue on merits. 08. Facts of case in a narrow compass shows that assessee filed his return of income on 31 August 2012 declaring total income of Rs. 167,09,146 which was subsequently revised on 25th of March 2014 declaring same

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5702/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

condone the delay in filing the return as the assessee has completed all the formalities for filing the return & it was just omitted to be uploaded by the assessee’s counsel due to some technical error/confusion ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 12. The ld.CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by observing that the contentions of the appellant that it was prevented

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5703/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

condone the delay in filing the return as the assessee has completed all the formalities for filing the return & it was just omitted to be uploaded by the assessee’s counsel due to some technical error/confusion ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 12. The ld.CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by observing that the contentions of the appellant that it was prevented

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5701/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

condone the delay in filing the return as the assessee has completed all the formalities for filing the return & it was just omitted to be uploaded by the assessee’s counsel due to some technical error/confusion ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 12. The ld.CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by observing that the contentions of the appellant that it was prevented

DCIT, HISAR vs. M/S SYNERGY WASTE MANAGEMENT PVT. LTD.,, HISAR

In the result, all the five captioned appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5704/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: Shri Ramesh Goyal, CA &For Respondent: Ms Kajal Singh, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 119Section 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 170Section 170(1)Section 44ASection 801ASection 80I

condone the delay in filing the return as the assessee has completed all the formalities for filing the return & it was just omitted to be uploaded by the assessee’s counsel due to some technical error/confusion ITA Nos.5701-5704/Del/2016 12. The ld.CIT(A) has granted relief to the assessee by observing that the contentions of the appellant that it was prevented

FAST BOOKING (I) PVT. LTD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -11(1)

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but in the circumstances,

ITA/338/2015HC Delhi02 Sept 2015
Section 10B

delay in filing was condoned, the ITAT declined to permit the Assessee to maintain the cross objections by following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT in ITO v. Neetee Clothing (P)Ltd. [2010] 129 TTJ 342 (ITAT [Del]), on the ground that since the Assessee had not urged the plea of being entitled to the benefit under

FAST BOOKING (I) PVT. LTD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -11(1)

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but in the circumstances,

ITA/342/2015HC Delhi02 Sept 2015
Section 10B

delay in filing was condoned, the ITAT declined to permit the Assessee to maintain the cross objections by following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT in ITO v. Neetee Clothing (P)Ltd. [2010] 129 TTJ 342 (ITAT [Del]), on the ground that since the Assessee had not urged the plea of being entitled to the benefit under

FAST BOOKING (I) PVT. LTD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -11(1)

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but in the circumstances,

ITA/334/2015HC Delhi02 Sept 2015
Section 10B

delay in filing was condoned, the ITAT declined to permit the Assessee to maintain the cross objections by following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT in ITO v. Neetee Clothing (P)Ltd. [2010] 129 TTJ 342 (ITAT [Del]), on the ground that since the Assessee had not urged the plea of being entitled to the benefit under

FAST BOOKING (I) PVT. LTD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -11(1)

The appeals are allowed in the above terms, but in the circumstances,

ITA/339/2015HC Delhi02 Sept 2015
Section 10B

delay in filing was condoned, the ITAT declined to permit the Assessee to maintain the cross objections by following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the ITAT in ITO v. Neetee Clothing (P)Ltd. [2010] 129 TTJ 342 (ITAT [Del]), on the ground that since the Assessee had not urged the plea of being entitled to the benefit under

INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 6748/DEL/2019[2013-14, 26Q, Qtr-3]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

10A, Nr Meenakshi Public School, Gurgaon PAN-AACF19005M 2 6748/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 26Q Q-3 3 6749/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 26Q Q-4 4 6750/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 27Q Q-2 5 6751/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 27Q Q-4 6752/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 24Q Q-4 6 7 6753/Del/2019

INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS,GURGAON vs. ITO, WARD (TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all appeals of different assesses are allowed

ITA 6749/DEL/2019[2013-14, 26Q, Qtr-4]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Vp & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar, Am [Through Video Conferencing]

For Appellant: Sh. M.R. Sahu, CAFor Respondent: Sh. M.Barnwal, Sr.DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 200A(1)(c)Section 200A(3)Section 234E

10A, Nr Meenakshi Public School, Gurgaon PAN-AACF19005M 2 6748/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 26Q Q-3 3 6749/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 26Q Q-4 4 6750/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 27Q Q-2 5 6751/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2013-14 27Q Q-4 6752/Del/2019 -Do- -Do- 2014-15 24Q Q-4 6 7 6753/Del/2019