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.

491 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 144clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai654Delhi491Chennai464Ahmedabad379Kolkata359Hyderabad320Pune316Bangalore278Jaipur272Surat228Indore151Amritsar144Karnataka129Chandigarh116Rajkot116Visakhapatnam115Lucknow114Cochin99Patna83Nagpur65Cuttack62Agra60Raipur37Calcutta37Guwahati35Jabalpur33Panaji30Jodhpur28Allahabad28Dehradun21SC9Varanasi8Ranchi6Orissa3Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1Andhra Pradesh1Telangana1

Key Topics

Section 14492Section 14777Addition to Income61Section 14847Section 234E42Condonation of Delay33Section 143(3)32Section 142(1)32Limitation/Time-bar

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)

Showing 1–20 of 491 · Page 1 of 25

...
28
Section 153D25
Natural Justice22
Section 143(1)21

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

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

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4667/DEL/2018[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1994-95

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2783/DEL/2012[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 2784/DEL/2012[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1994-95

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

BRIJESH CHARITABLE TRUST,PANIPAT vs. ACIT, CIRCLE PANIPAT, PANIPAT

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4666/DEL/2018[1993-94]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2022AY 1993-94

Bench: Shri Saktijit Deyassessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95 With Assessment Year: 1993-94 With Assessment Year: 1994-95

Section 144Section 154

section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short ‘the Act’) on 28.02.2005. The Registry has pointed out delay of 3853 days in filing these appeal. Therefore, at the outset, we have to address the issue of condonation

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

Section 249(3) of the I.T. Act. The appeal is therefore not admitted and proceeded with, and therefore dismissed in limine. However, without any prejudice to the rejection of appellant's condonation of delay plea resulting in appeal being dismissed in limine, appellant's appeal is considered for disposal on facts of case as available on record and keeping

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

Section 249(3) of the I.T. Act. The appeal is therefore not admitted and proceeded with, and therefore dismissed in limine. However, without any prejudice to the rejection of appellant's condonation of delay plea resulting in appeal being dismissed in limine, appellant's appeal is considered for disposal on facts of case as available on record and keeping

EAST END APARTMENTS CGHS LTD,DELHI vs. ITO, WARD 60(1), DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed as above terms for statistical purposes

ITA 5054/DEL/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148ASection 249(3)Section 250

condone the delay. 4. Aggrieved by the impugned order, the assessee is in appeal before us and raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The CIT (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) has grievously erred in law and on facts, confirming the order passed under section 144

JAGDISH SINGH,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(3), GHAZIABAD

ITA 4586/DEL/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Aug 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Sinha, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. K. Gupta, Sr. D. R
Section 144Section 148Section 234Section 234BSection 271(1)(c)

Delay condoned Application ‘It is requested, to kindly provide the sufficient and reasonable time, opportunity for hearing before taking any decision” in reply filed on 21.02.2019 in continuation of reply dated 12.02.2019 against Notice dt. 28.01.2019 related to F. No. CIT(A)GZB/2018-19/1527. ii. That the Ld. CIT (A) has not considered the circumstances for not appearing before the concerning

DIVESH VERMA,BENGALURU vs. ITO,WARD-1(1), FARIDABAD

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

ITA 5961/DEL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Vimal Kumarassessment Year: 2017-18 Divesh Verma, Vs. Income Tax Officer, C-804, Veracious Vani Vilas Ward-1(1), Apartments, Doddaballapur Faridabad Main Road, Yelahanka, (Haryana) Bengalure-560064, Karnataka Pan: Aehpv6594H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Balaja V, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

section 90 of the Act read with CBDT Circular No. 333 dated 2nd April, 1982. The relief claimed was denied and TDS credit was not allowed in full as reflected in Form 26AS by then Ld. AO vide order dated 04.01.2020. 3. Against order dated 04.01.2020 of Ld. Assessing Officer, the appellant/assessee filed application for condonation of delay of 144

ANIL JAIN ,NEW DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , DELHI

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

ITA 1192/DEL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jun 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year 2011-12

For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 249(2)Section 249(3)

Section 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning A.Y. 2011-12. 2. The assessee as per its grounds of appeal has raised several grievances. One of the grievance relates to adjudication of first appellate order ex-parte refusing to condone delay

AMIT GUPTA,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(5), GHAZIABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 8750/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudhryamit Gupta Vs. Ito D-63, Gf, Kaushambi, Ward-1(5), Ghaziabad, Up-201 012 Ghaziabad

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148

condonation of delay filed by the appellant. 4. The Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred on facts as well as in law in confirming the addition of Rs. 61,43,940/- without appreciating the fact that the Ld. AO passed order under section 144

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2553/DEL/2013[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1999-00

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

144, order u/s 147, order u/s 155, order u/s 250, order u/s 254, order u/s 260, order u/s 262, order u/s 263, order u/s 264, order u/s 245D(4). It directs the revenue authorities to re- compute the interest payable and to notify the assessee with a demand notice in case there is any increase in the interest payable

MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT (OSD), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 468/DEL/2014[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1994-95

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

144, order u/s 147, order u/s 155, order u/s 250, order u/s 254, order u/s 260, order u/s 262, order u/s 263, order u/s 264, order u/s 245D(4). It directs the revenue authorities to re- compute the interest payable and to notify the assessee with a demand notice in case there is any increase in the interest payable

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 599/DEL/2014[1994-95]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1994-95

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

144, order u/s 147, order u/s 155, order u/s 250, order u/s 254, order u/s 260, order u/s 262, order u/s 263, order u/s 264, order u/s 245D(4). It directs the revenue authorities to re- compute the interest payable and to notify the assessee with a demand notice in case there is any increase in the interest payable

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2641/DEL/2013[1999-00]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Aug 2020AY 1999-00

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2553/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income Tax Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, (Appeals)-Ix, Income Tax Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 Office, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 2641/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 1999-00 Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-6(1), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q Ita No. 468/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 1994-95 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Jcit(Osd), Plot No. 1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-6(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacm0829Q

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Pramita M. Biswas, CIT DR
Section 143(1)Section 244ASection 244A(1)Section 244A(1)(a)Section 244A(3)Section 254

144, order u/s 147, order u/s 155, order u/s 250, order u/s 254, order u/s 260, order u/s 262, order u/s 263, order u/s 264, order u/s 245D(4). It directs the revenue authorities to re- compute the interest payable and to notify the assessee with a demand notice in case there is any increase in the interest payable

CHANDRAPAL,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD-1(2), GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 8964/DEL/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Saurabh Tyagi, C.AFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148

section 144/ 147 of the I.T. Act, 1961. I find the Ld. CIT(A) issued notice of hearing to the assessee in the address given as per Form No.35 asking the assessee to explain the delay in filing of the appeal. However, there was no response from the side of the assessee, for which, the Ld. CIT(A) was constrained

MARKS CONSOLIDATED BUSINESS LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, WARD-6(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the Appeal filed by the Assessee stands allowed

ITA 7312/DEL/2018[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jan 2019AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2003-04 Marks Consolidated Vs. Ito, Ward 6(2), Business Ltd., New Delhi 1497, Bhardwaj Bhawan, Wazir Nagar, Kotla , New Delhi (Pan: Aaacm8113H)

For Appellant: Sh. Mushtaq Ahmed Mir, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 151Section 253(3)Section 68

144 read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 which is bad in law and against the facts and circumstances of the case. The order therefore deserves to be quashed. 2. The AO has erred in law and facts by issuing notice u/s. 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as reasons recorded and satisfaction accorded

HAR PRASHAD BHUTANI,GHAZIABAD vs. ITO WARD - 1(3), GHAZIABAD

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

ITA 1522/DEL/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda

For Appellant: Shri Sushil Antal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 69

144 of 3 ITA.No.1522/Del./2020 Shri Harparshad Bhutani, Ghaziabad. the I.T. Act, 1961. He observed that the assessee filed return of income on 12.03.2011 declaring income of Rs.1,62,260/-. The assessee himself appeared before the A.O. and filed copy of bank statement only. Further, the assessee did not appear thereafter to explain the source of cash deposited