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.

73 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 249(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai228Chennai140Kolkata128Chandigarh120Delhi105Bangalore104Ahmedabad100Hyderabad73Raipur71Jaipur68Surat57Pune56Indore53Visakhapatnam37Lucknow35Panaji28Agra25Amritsar25Patna23Cuttack23Nagpur14Rajkot13Guwahati12Jodhpur11Ranchi11Jabalpur9Allahabad6Cochin5Dehradun3SC2Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 14772Section 15456Section 14444Condonation of Delay44Section 14841Section 142(1)34Addition to Income31Section 200A28Section 270A

DEMI REALTORS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes on the above terms

ITA 156/HYD/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Respondent: Ms. T. Vijaya Lakhsmi, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 40Section 40A(3)Section 40a

condoned. 2. Ajmer Sharaf & Co., Vs. ITO 61 Taxmann.com (Madras) – Each day delay needs to be explained – 754 days delay rejected. 3. Vama Apparels (I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT, 102 Taxmann.com 398 (Bombay), 2019- delay of 507 days rejected.” 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Before we decide on the issue

Showing 1–20 of 73 · Page 1 of 4

25
Limitation/Time-bar22
Section 69A20
TDS15

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2050/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

condoning delay in filing appeals. Section 249(3)of the Act, that allows the FAA to admit belated appeals, reads

PARANJYOTHI THOTA,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-5(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 2079/HYD/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad25 Feb 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos. 2050 & 2079/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2012-13) Smt. Paran Jyothi Thota Vs. Asstt. Cit Hyderabad Circle 5(1) Pan:Ajqpt7772F Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Advocate C. Anurag रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 12/02/2026 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Pronouncement: 25/02/2026 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M. These Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Orders Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi, Dated 09/09/2025 & 25/09/2025, For The Assessment Year 2012-13. Page 1 Of 33

For Appellant: Advocate C. AnuragFor Respondent: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 271(1)(c)Section 50C

condoning delay in filing appeals. Section 249(3)of the Act, that allows the FAA to admit belated appeals, reads

KUMUD BAJAJ,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-1, KHAMMAM

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 782/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.782/Hyd/2025 ("नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2016-17) Kumud Bajaj, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Hyderabad. Ward-1, Pan: Acepb3914A Khammam. (Appellant) (Respondent) "नधा"रती "वारा/Assessee By: Smt. S. Sandhya, Advocate राज" व "वारा/Revenue By: Shri K. Vamsi Krishna, Sr. Ar

For Appellant: Smt. S. Sandhya, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri K. Vamsi Krishna, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 69A

delayed the filing of the appeal before the CIT(A) by 01 year 07 months (594 days), therefore, he had declined to condone the same in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249

VASAVI CLUB,HYDERABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-11(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 994/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 115TSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 249(2)Section 249(3)

delay occurred due to mistake committed by the tax consultant, non-communication of notices and assessment order, and that the assessee became aware of the assessment and demand only when the department officials contacted the assessee for payment of tax. 5.5 Under Section 249(3) of the Act, the Commissioner (Appeals) has discretion to condone

MALIREDDI SRINATH,HYDERABAD vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), HDYERABAD, HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1721/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI MANJUNATHA G, HON’BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 69A

condonation of delay and the submissions made by the assessee, held that the appeal was filed 4 Malreddy Srinath beyond the period prescribed under Section 249(2) of the Act and that the assessee failed to establish sufficient cause within the meaning of Section 249(3

KARIMNAGAR MILK PRODUCER COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1, KARIMNAGAR

ITA 1388/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 May 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(2)Section 145(3)Section 270A

condoning the same.\n\n14. Apropos the impugned order before us, we find that the CIT(A)\nhad dismissed the appeal by declining to exercise the discretion\nvested him under sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act and not\ncondoning the delay

ARYA VYSYA TRUST,VIKARABAD vs. ITO., WARD-1, VIKARABAD

ITA 215/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Mar 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Us:

Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 144

condone the delay by refraining from exercising the discretion that was otherwise vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249

PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED CHINNA GOLKONDA,SHAMSHABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-8(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1262/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Apr 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us:

For Appellant: Mrs. S. SandhyaFor Respondent: Shri B. Bala Krishna – CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 250Section 80P

delay of 1379 days, but as the assessee society had failed to come forth with any explanation regarding the reasons due to which the said appeal could not be filed within the prescribed period, therefore, he declined to condone the same in exercise of the powers vested with him under sub-section (3) of Section 249

REVANTH REDDY ANUMALA,BANJARA HILLS vs. A.C.I.T CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), HYDERABAD

ITA 650/HYD/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad28 Jan 2026AY 2017-2018
For Appellant: CA K C DevdasFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR

249 of the Income Tax Act", "Section 5 of the Limitation Act", "Section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961" ], "issues": "1. Whether the delay in filing the appeal can be condoned due to a sufficient cause. 2. Whether the order passed by the learned CIT(A) is invalid for not mentioning the Document Identification Number (DIN). 3

PRIMARY AGRICULTURAL CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LIMITED CHENNARAOPET,WARANGAL vs. ITO, WARD-1, WARANGAL

ITA 3/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Us:

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 249Section 249(3)Section 250Section 5Section 80P

condonation of the delay of 388 days involved in filing of the appeal before the CIT(A), therefore the latter, after drawing support from a host of judicial pronouncements, dismissed the appeal on the ground that the same was barred by limitation under Section 249(3

RAMULU BANDI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1126/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us: Ramulu Bandi, Hyderabad.

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 69A

delay, therefore, the CIT(A) in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub- section (3) of Section 249 of the Act had rightly refused to condone

RAMULU BANDI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1139/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us: Ramulu Bandi, Hyderabad.

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 69A

delay, therefore, the CIT(A) in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub- section (3) of Section 249 of the Act had rightly refused to condone

RAMULU BANDI,HYDERABAD vs. ITO WARD-13(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1140/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad06 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Us: Ramulu Bandi, Hyderabad.

Section 143(2)Section 144Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)Section 69A

delay, therefore, the CIT(A) in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub- section (3) of Section 249 of the Act had rightly refused to condone

APMDC SCCL SULIYARI COAL COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE- 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1515/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1501, 1514, 1515 & 1529/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Ay: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Vs. Dcit, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aalca9755A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act. For the sake

APMDC SCCL SULIYARI COAL COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1529/HYD/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1501, 1514, 1515 & 1529/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Ay: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Vs. Dcit, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aalca9755A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act. For the sake

APMDC SCCL SULIYARI COAL COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1501/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1501, 1514, 1515 & 1529/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Ay: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Vs. Dcit, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aalca9755A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act. For the sake

APMDC SCCL SULIYARI COAL COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 1514/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1501, 1514, 1515 & 1529/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Ay: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Vs. Dcit, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aalca9755A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act. For the sake

APMDC SCCL SULIYARI COAL COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 2271/HYD/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1501, 1514, 1515 & 1529/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Ay: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Vs. Dcit, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aalca9755A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act. For the sake

APMDC SCCL SULIYARI COAL COMPANY LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(1), HYDERBAD

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee company are disposed of as under:

ITA 2272/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1501, 1514, 1515 & 1529/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Ay: 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2019-20) Apmdc Sccl Suliyari Coal Vs. Dcit, Company Limited, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan: Aalca9755A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan KumarFor Respondent: Shri Sankar Pandi P, Sr. AR
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 270ASection 271(1)(c)

condone the delay in exercise of the discretion vested with him under sub-section (3) of section 249 of the Act. For the sake