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.

34 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 246A(1)(c)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi160Chennai66Pune50Mumbai43Bangalore35Indore34Panaji19Kolkata12Patna9Nagpur9Chandigarh9Visakhapatnam7Jaipur7Ahmedabad5Raipur5Hyderabad4Lucknow3Jodhpur2Cuttack2Agra1Jabalpur1Allahabad1Surat1

Key Topics

Section 25036Section 25328Section 14725Addition to Income23Section 14819Section 246A19Section 14418Section 270A18Section 142(1)

VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeals are allowed

ITA 189/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 269SSection 271D

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3.Since the issue for adjudication in these appeals is identical; they were heard together at the request of parties and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience, brevity and clarity. 4. The background facts leading to these appeals are such that the asesesee was a director

VIMAL TODI,INDORE vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, INDORE

Appeals are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

15
Penalty13
Condonation of Delay11
Cash Deposit5
ITA 190/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyani

Section 132Section 153ASection 253(5)Section 269SSection 271D

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 3.Since the issue for adjudication in these appeals is identical; they were heard together at the request of parties and are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience, brevity and clarity. 4. The background facts leading to these appeals are such that the asesesee was a director

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 917/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

delay in filing of TDS statements. In this sense, insertion of clause (c) to section 200A(1), is only an addendum to the section to provide for the machinery provision to compute the fee payable u/s 234E at the time of processing of TDS statement and the same is enabling for processes in nature. This is very much evident

SUPREME TRANSPORT COMPANY,INDORE vs. ITO TDS-II, INDORE

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 914/IND/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore13 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

delay in filing of TDS statements. In this sense, insertion of clause (c) to section 200A(1), is only an addendum to the section to provide for the machinery provision to compute the fee payable u/s 234E at the time of processing of TDS statement and the same is enabling for processes in nature. This is very much evident

BMG CALCUTTAWALA JEWELLERS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. AO CPC (TDS), ITO TDS(1) INDORE, INDORE

Appeals are allowed\"

ITA 136/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Nov 2025AY 2013-14
Section 200Section 200(3)Section 200A(1)Section 234ESection 246ASection 250Section 253

delay. Accordingly, the demand on account of 234E\nis cancelled.\n8. Similarly interest u/s 220(2) cannot be levied when fee u/s\n234E itself is not leviable. In so far as charging of interest u/s\n201(IA), the same cannot be charged as admittedly no order u/s\n201(1) has been passed holding the assessee to be \"assessee in\ndefault

MALA DHIRENDRA SINGH,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(4), INDORE

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

ITA 791/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing No:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079308840(1) dated 05.08.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is hereinafter referred

MALA DHIRENDRA SINGH,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4), INDORE

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

ITA 790/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Apr 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing No:-ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1079308840(1) dated 05.08.2025 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is hereinafter referred

SHRI DANDI SEWA ASHRAM,ONKARESHWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION , BHOPAL

In the result the \"Impugned order\" is set aside as and by\nway of remand back to the file of the Ld

ITA 560/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18
Section 10Section 10(24)Section 11Section 124Section 143(1)Section 154Section 246ASection 250Section 253

246A of the act before the Ld. CIT (A) who by the\n“impugned order\" had dismissed the first appeal of the\nassessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The\ncore grounds and reasons for the dismissal of the first appeal\nwere as under:-\n“6. In the instant case, order u/s 154 of the Act was passed

ABDE ALI,INDORE vs. ITO BURHANPUR, BURHANPUR

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

ITA 647/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience & brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .In the ITA No:- 647/Ind/2025 the Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/250/2024-25/1066202361(1) dated 28.06.2024 passed

ABDE ALI,INDORE vs. ITO , BURHANPUR

In the result the “Impugned order” is set aside as and by

ITA 648/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 147Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 69A

section 253 of the income tax Act 1961,[ herein after referred to as the Act for the sake of convenience & brevity] before this tribunal, as & by way of a second appeal .In the ITA No:- 647/Ind/2025 the Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/250/2024-25/1066202361(1) dated 28.06.2024 passed

JAYKRISHNAN NAIR,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX APPEALS, DELHI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 732/IND/2024[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Indore24 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 144Section 246ASection 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/ 1065879845(1) dated 20.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. Page 1 of 13 Jaykrishnan Nair

JAYKRISHNAN NAIR,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -3(1, BHOPAL

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 538/IND/2024[2010-11]Status: HeardITAT Indore24 Jun 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 144Section 246ASection 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

Section 253 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for sake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/ 1065879845(1) dated 20.06.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. Page 1 of 13 Jaykrishnan Nair

ARP SECURITIES LIMITED,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER- 1(1), INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose

ITA 218/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Sept 2025AY 2016-17
Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 68

condoned the delay in filing the appeal, finding sufficient cause. On merits, the Tribunal found the \"impugned order\" to be not meritorious and set it aside. The case was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for a de novo assessment.", "result": "Partly Allowed", "sections": [ "253", "250", "147", "144", "144B", "68", "148", "142(1)", "246A", "148(2)", "153A

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 670/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Oct 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 253Section 270ASection 270A(9)(a)Section 274

246A of the Act on\nPage 4 of 22\n06.11.2023 (Form No.35) before Ld. CIT(A) who by the\n\"impugned order” has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on\nthe grounds and reasons stated therein. The core ground and\nreasons for dismissal of 1st appeal was as under:-\n“There exists no sufficient or good reason for condoning\ninordinate

SHEETAL NATH COLONIZERS,BHOPAL vs. ITO,1(2), BHOPAL, AAYKAR BHAWAN, BHOPAL

In the result the impugned order is set aside as & by way of

ITA 1094/IND/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshisheetal Nath Colonizers, Ito 1(2) बनाम/ Plot No.48, M/S Sheetal Nath Bhopal Vs. Colonizers, Near Arya Bhawan, M. P. Nagar Zone Ii Bhopal (Pan: Abzfs4967L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & Shri N. D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 29.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 19.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)Section 60

section 115BBE of the Act was proposed. Penalty proceeding u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act was also proposed in SCN. In response thereto AR of the assessee furnished reply on 28.02.2002 at final stage of assessment proceedings which examined and found not convincing. The relevant portion of reply is reproduced herewith. Para-4 of reply dated 28.12.2022 During

MANOJ KUMAR GANGADHARAN,BHOPAL vs. ITO (IT AND TP) BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 671/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore09 Oct 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 143(3)Section 24Section 250Section 253Section 270ASection 270A(9)(a)Section 274

246A of the Act on Page 4 of 22 Manoj Kumar Gangadharan ITA No. 670&671 /Ind/2024 - A.Ys.2017-18&2018-19 06.11.2023 (Form No.35) before Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the grounds and reasons stated therein. The core ground and reasons for dismissal of 1st appeal

BABITA CHELAWAT,INDORE vs. DCIT/ACIT 1(1), INDORE, INDORE

The appeal of the assessee is allowed & the impugned order is set aside

ITA 611/IND/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Mar 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253

246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “Impugned Order” has dismissed the 1st appeal of the Assessee on the grounds & reasons stated therein. The core grounds & reasons for the dismissal of the 1st appeal were as under:- “8.0 Decision:- Page 2 of 18 Babita Chelawat ITA No. 611/Ind/2025 - A.Y.2012-13 8.1 I have gone through

RAJESH KUMAR SAXENA,PACHORE RAJGARH vs. ITO RAJGARH, RAJGARJ MP

Appeal of the assesse is allowed for statistical\npurpose

ITA 327/IND/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore21 Nov 2025AY 2009-10
Section 133Section 142(1)Section 144Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253

condone the delay and\nappeal is admitted.\n3.2 The Ld. AR then submitted that in so far as merit of the\ncase is concerned there is an addition of Rs.36,64,145/- in the\n"impugned assessment order” dated 28.03.2016. The assessee\nis a distributor of Bharti Airtel. The Ld. AR has placed on record\nof this tribunal a paper

ARP SECURITIES LIMITED,INDORE vs. NATIONAL FACELESS ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 150/IND/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshi

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 68

246A of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A) who by the “impugned order” has dismissed the 1st appeal of the assessee on the Page 2 of 10 ARP Securities Ld ITA No.150 & 218/Ind/2025 - A.Y. 2016-17 grounds and reasons stated therein. The core grounds and reasons for the dismissal of the 1st appeal was as under:- “5. In Ground

KAUSHALYA AGARWAL TRUST,INDORE vs. CPC BANGLORE, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, INDORE

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical\npurpose

ITA 890/IND/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Jun 2025AY 2017-2018
Section 154Section 164Section 246ASection 253

condoned as\nsufficient cause is shown and appeal is admitted. It is\naccordingly taken up for hearing.\n3.2 The Ld. AR then brought to our notice that in the\n\"impugned order” the 1st appeal was dismissed only on ground\nof delay in the filing of the 1st appeal by 120 days. It was\ncontended that