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.

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 80Cclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur28Lucknow12Bangalore12Mumbai12Pune8Kolkata8Indore7Varanasi6Chennai6Raipur4Hyderabad4Ahmedabad3Delhi3Surat3Nagpur2Visakhapatnam2Patna1Chandigarh1Amritsar1SC1Allahabad1Cochin1Jodhpur1Panaji1

Key Topics

Section 80C5Section 271B5Section 1473Section 80T3Section 1453Deduction3Condonation of Delay3Section 1482Section 143(3)2

SANGEETA AKKARAJU CHANDRASEKHAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-14(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1076/HYD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit In Support Of The Condonation Petition, Wherein She Has Mentioned The Reasons For The Delay & Submitted That The Delay Occurred Due To Factors Beyond Her Control, With No Deliberate Intention To Defer The Filing Of The Appeal. On The Other Hand, The Learned Senior A.R. For The Revenue, Shri Mathivanan, S.A. Did Not Strongly Oppose The Condonation Of Delay Petition Filed By The Assessee.

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 80CSection 80T

condone the delay of 25 days 3 Sangeeta Akkaraju Chandrasekhar in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and admit the appeal for adjudication. 4. The brief facts of the case are that, in this case, information has been flagged in the Actionable Information Monitoring System. On verification, it is found that, the assessee has not filed any return of income

Addition to Income2

DAKAPPAGARI NAVEEN KUMAR,MEDAK vs. ITO., WARD - 1, SANGAREDDY

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly\nallowed

ITA 911/HYD/2024[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Hyderabad20 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
For Respondent: \nCA A Srinivas
Section 143(3)Section 145(3)Section 69ASection 80C

delay of one day, which was condoned by the tribunal. The grounds of appeal included issues related to the rejection of books of accounts, addition of unexplained cash deposits, and disallowance of a deduction under Section 80C

BHARAT KUMAR BANSAL,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CENTRAL CIRCLE -2(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are\nallowed

ITA 1001/HYD/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Jan 2026AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri A Srinivas, CA
Section 153C

delay of 06\ndays in filing of all these appeals are condoned, and the appeals\nare admitted for adjudication on merits.\n3.\nIdentical grounds have been raised by the assessee in\nITA Nos.1000 to 1005/Hyd/2025 of the appeals. For the purpose\nof clarity, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA\nNo.1000/Hyd/2025 are reproduced as under:\n4.\nThe assessee

NARESH KUMAR,HYDERABAD vs. ITO., WARD-8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 547/HYD/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Karthik Manickam, SR-DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 145Section 147Section 148Section 271BSection 274Section 44ASection 80C

delay of 10 days in filing of this appeal is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal : ITA No.547/Hyd/2025 3 4. The brief facts of the case are that, the assessee is an individual who had not filed any return of income under section 139(1) of the Income