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.

149 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 43Bclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai256Kolkata150Delhi149Pune120Mumbai96Bangalore77Nagpur59Hyderabad52Jaipur47Ahmedabad36Cuttack31Indore30Chandigarh27Surat26Lucknow25Visakhapatnam22Amritsar21Cochin12Raipur11Guwahati10Allahabad9Jodhpur7Varanasi6Calcutta3Rajkot3Patna3SC3Panaji1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 43B99Section 36(1)(va)91Section 143(1)58Disallowance34Addition to Income33Section 139(1)24Section 143(1)(a)21Deduction15Section 36(1)

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. DEWAN SUGAR LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5784/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Nov 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit, Vs. M/S. Dewan Sugar Ltd., Circle-10(1), New Delhi Surya Plaza, 1St Floor, K- 185, Sarai Jullena, New Friends Colony, New Delhi Pan :Aaacd3465H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2(24)Section 36

section 36(1)(va), if the actual payment towards the PF/CSI contributions is made before the return is filed. The relevant finding of the Hon’ble High Court is reproduced as under: 17 “11. Before we delve into this discussion, we may take note of some more provisions of the Act. Sec. 2(24) of the Act enumerates different components

INDIAN GEOTECHNICAL SERVICES,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CIRCLE- 61(1), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

Showing 1–20 of 149 · Page 1 of 8

...
14
Section 2(24)(x)9
Section 2507
Condonation of Delay5
ITA 622/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Shri Brij Kishor Anand, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr.D.R

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

FLYING FABRICATION ,GURGAON vs. ADIT, CPC, BENGALURUR

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 1407/DEL/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Ms. Swati Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr.D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 244ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(v)

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

FLYING FABRICATION,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 1049/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Nov 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Ms. Swati Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Mrinal Kumar Das, Sr.D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 244ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(v)

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

SUGANDH,MORADABAD vs. ITD, CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1259/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2018-19] Sugandh, Vs Itd, Jawahar Market, G.M.D.Road, Cpc, Moradabad, Uttar Pradesh-244001. Bengaluru. Pan-Aaefs7109J Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Sh. Om Prakash, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 30.12.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 30.12.2021

Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

43B on account of delayed payment of employees' contribution to PF and ESI. 2. That on this issue there are no. of judicial Pronouncements in favour of the assessee, including & delivered by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahbad, being the jurisdictional High Court in the matter of Sagun Foundary (P) Limited vs CIT Kanpur. 3. That on the facts

NEELKANTH INFERTILITY AND IVF HOSPITAL,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CC-1, GURGAON

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 453/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

MOHAMMED MUJEEB,DELHI vs. WARD-66(4), DELHI

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 392/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

BMK BUSINESS HOTELS & RESORTS PVT LTD,NEW DELHI vs. ADIT CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 1752/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Manish Malik, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

MOHAMMED MUJEEB,DELHI vs. WARD-69(4), DELHI

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 393/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Hemant Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

NARANG SCIENTIFIC WORKS,C-255 vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIVIC CENTRE

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 326/DEL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

KAILASH HOSPITAL & METERNITY ,UTTARPRADESH vs. WARD 1(1)(3), UTTARPARDESH

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 335/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

SURENDER GAHLOT ,HARYANA vs. WARD 4(3), HARYANA

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 287/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

MOHAN SERVICES,HARYANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, CIRCLE 2(1), GURGAON

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 321/DEL/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

JAMAN LAL,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD - 62(2), NEW DELHI

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 1679/DEL/2020[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

M/S BALAJI ALUMINIUM ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED,FARIDABAD vs. DCIT CPC, BENGALURU

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 1190/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Jitender Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

FLOURTECH ENGINEERS P LTD,FARIDABAD vs. CIRCLE-1, FARIDABAD

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 67/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Singla, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

FAARIHA TYAGI ,HARYANA vs. WARD 1(4), GURGAON

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 51/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Garg, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 2Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

RAJESH KUMAR ,FARIDABAD vs. WARD 2(2), FARIDABAD

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 41/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Jitender Wadhva, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

MULTI MAX ENGINEERING WORK PVT. LTD. ,DELHI vs. CIRCLE 17(2), DELHI

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 1/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: PendingITAT Delhi04 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before filing of the return. Special

DSD AND MATWAR SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. WARD-7(4), DELHI

In the result, the disallowance confirmed by the Appeal Centre is deleted

ITA 69/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Apr 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Yadav, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Radha Katyal Narang, Senior DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

Delay condoned. In the present case we are concerned with the law as it stood prior to the amendment of Section 43-B. In the circumstances, the assessee was entitled to claim the 5 ITA Nos.68 & 69/Del./2022 benefit in Section 43-B for that period particularly in view of the fact that he has contributed to provident fund before