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.

16 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 9(1)(vii)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai171Chennai150Delhi145Bangalore95Chandigarh89Jaipur82Kolkata79Ahmedabad74Pune72Hyderabad67Raipur49Amritsar37Panaji35Rajkot32Cochin24Surat23Nagpur20SC19Cuttack16Indore16Lucknow16Guwahati11Visakhapatnam9Patna6Varanasi6Dehradun4Jabalpur3Jodhpur3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Agra1

Key Topics

Section 26322Section 234E16Section 12A13Section 143(3)13Section 1110Condonation of Delay9Section 142(1)6Section 200A6Section 253

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

vii) Sree Narayana Guru Smaraka Sangam Upper Primary School v. UOI [2017] 77 taxmann.com 244/245 Taxman 312/392 ITR 457 (Ker.) (viii) Dr. Amrit Lal Mangal v. Union of India [2015] 62 taxmann.com 310/235 Taxman 410 (Punj. & Har.) 10. The ld. DR submitted that a harmonious and conjoint reading of provisions of section 234E & Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2012, Section 271H

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: Disposed
5
Addition to Income5
TDS4
Exemption4
ITAT Indore
13 Oct 2025
AY 2013-14

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

Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 234E

vii) Sree Narayana Guru Smaraka Sangam Upper Primary School v. UOI [2017] 77 taxmann.com 244/245 Taxman 312/392 ITR 457 (Ker.) (viii) Dr. Amrit Lal Mangal v. Union of India [2015] 62 taxmann.com 310/235 Taxman 410 (Punj. & Har.) 10. The ld. DR submitted that a harmonious and conjoint reading of provisions of section 234E & Memorandum to Finance Bill, 2012, Section 271H

SHREE SHANTANU VIDHYAPEETH SOCIETY ,INDORE, M.P. vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 640/IND/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(2)Section 139Section 142(1)Section 143(3)

vii) Still aggrieved, the assessee has come in next appeal before us.\n\n3. The appeal was initially heard by this very bench on 24.07.2025.\nSubsequently, vide Order-Sheet dated 29.07.2025 re-produced below, it was\nre-listed on 31.07.2025 for a clarification from assessee/appellant:\n\nITA 640/Ind/2024\n(Assessment Year: 2018-19)\n\nIn the case of\nSHREE SHANTANU

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

vii)\nSree Narayana Guru Smaraka Sangam Upper\nPrimary School v. UOI [2017] 77 taxmann.com\n244/245 Taxman 312/392 ITR 457 (Ker.)\n(viii)\nDr. Amrit Lal Mangal v. Union of India [2015] 62\ntaxmann.com 310/235 Taxman 410 (Punj. &\nHar.)\n10. The Id. DR submitted that a harmonious and conjoint\nreading of provisions of section 234E & Memorandum to Finance\nBill, 2012, Section

M.P. STATE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT-1, BHOPAL

ITA 158/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Manish Borad & Ms. Madhumita Royvirtual Hearing Assessment Year: 2015-16

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 41(1)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 3. Brief facts of the case as culled out from the records are that the assessee company is engaged in the Financial Assistance for industrial development and infrastructure. It declared total loss at Rs.1,55,62,351/- in the return filed on 30.09.2015. The case was selected for limited

KUSUM YADAV,INDORE vs. PCIT (1), INDORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 511/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore24 Apr 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Bagirath Mal Biyani & Sh. Udayan Das Gupta

Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 253(1)Section 263

Section 3 of the Limitation Act; I.T.A. No.511/Ind/2024 11 Assessment Year: 2014-15 (v) Courts are empowered to exercise discretion to condone the delay if sufficient cause had been explained, but that exercise of power is discretionary in nature and may not be exercised even if sufficient cause is established for various factors such as, where there is inordinate delay

ADIM JATI SEWA SAHKARI SAMITI MYDT JOBAT,ALIRAJPUR vs. FACELESS ASSESSMENT OFFICER, ALIRAJPUR

ITA 663/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiadim Jati Sewa Sahkari Samiti National Faceless बनाम/ Mydt., Assessment Centre Vs. 01, Jobat, Jobat, Delhi Alirajpur (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaala0577E Assessee By Shri P.D. Nagar, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr

Section 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 80P(2)(d)Section 80P(4)

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 4. The assessee is a co-operative society engaged in business of providing credit facilities to its members. For AY 2020-21, the assessee filed return declaring total income of Rs. 40/-. In the return of income so filed, the assessee claimed deduction

ROSHNI HOMI DAJI BAHU UDDESHIYA SHIKSHA AVM SARVAJANIK NYAS,INDORE vs. CPC, BENGLURU, BENGLURU

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 142/IND/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Indore25 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year:2023-24 Roshni Homi Daji Bahu Cpc, Bengaluru Uddeshiya Shiksha Avm Sarvajanik Nyas, बनाम/ 119, Kanlindi Kunj, Vs. Pipliyahana Square, Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aaetr9004R Assessee By Shri S.S. Deshpande, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 22.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement 25.09.2025

Section 11Section 11(1)(a)Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 13(10)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

vii) Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-appeal but the CIT(A) rejected assessee’s appeal by following order: “5.7 In order to get entitlement for claiming exemption of its income u/s 11 of the Act, it is mandatory on the part of the appellant to file the Form No. 10BB in due time or get a condonation

M/S AADHAR ASSOCIATES,BHOPAL vs. PR CIT-2, BHOPAL

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 300/IND/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Aadhar Associates Pr. Cit-1 76, Shanker Garden Near Bhopal Queen Mery School Vs. Ayodhya By Pass Road Bhopal (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aavfa 7526 Q Assessee By Shri Ashish Goyal & N.D. Patwa, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31.05.2023

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 330 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The Id CIT was not justified in passing order u/s. 263, which is bad-in-law, void ab initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled

MOHAMMAD ZAHOOR QURESHI,BHOPAL vs. ITO-4(2), BHOPAL

ITA 557/IND/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore17 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Paresh M Joshi & Shri Bijayananda Prusethassessment Year: 2014-15 Mohammad Zahoor Ito 4(2), Qureshi, Bhopal House No.956, Bagh Farhat Afza Gate Ke Andar, बनाम/ Gali No.2, Vs. Near Rajesh Cycle Aishbagh Stadium, Bhopal

Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253Section 50CSection 54FSection 56(2)(vii)

Delay condoned. Appeal taken for hearing. 2. FACTUAL MATRIX 2.1 That the assessee had filed his return of income on 26.02.2016 wherein a total income of Rs.2,14,400/- was declared. 2.2 That the return of income was processed u/s 143(1) of the Act. 2.3 That the Department of Income Tax had an information that during the Financial Year

AARAMBH FOUNDATION,INDORE vs. THE CIT EXEMPTION, BYHOPAL

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 90/IND/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Indore04 Jan 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyaniaarambh Foundation Cit-(Exemption) 220 Saket Nagar Bhopal Saket Nagar Vs. Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aabaa 0609F Assessee By Shri Kunal Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 12.12.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 04.01.2024

Section 12A

delay of 93 days in filing the appeal is condoned. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT grossly erred in issuing order rejecting application for registration under section 12AB of the Act. 2. The Ld. CIT grossly erred on facts and also in law by considering charitable activities as commercial activities and rejecting application

KHOJEMA BOHRA,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, NFAC, DELHI

Appeals are allowed

ITA 812/IND/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Indore22 Jan 2026AY 2014-2015
Section 115BSection 147Section 250Section 253Section 271(1)(c)Section 68

9 of 13\nKhojema Bohra\nITA No. 812 & 814/Ind/2024 - A.Y.2014-15 & 2013-14\nfiling. It is a nominal delay. The Ld. Dr has left the issue of\ncondonation of delay to the wisdom of the Tribunal. We after\nhearing both the parties condone the delay as assessee has\nshown sufficient\ncause. The delay is bonafide too.\nAccordingly we admit the appeal

DCIT-4(1), INDORE, INDORE vs. MARAL OVERSEAS LTD, KHARGONE

In the result, the “Impugned

ITA 569/IND/2025[1992-93]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 1992-93

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshideputy Commissioner Of Maral Overseas Ltd. बनाम/ Income Tax- 4(1) Maral Srovar, V & Po, Vs. Indore Khalbujurg, Kasrawad, Khargone, Bhopal (Pan: Aaccm0230B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Satyajeet Goyal, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 03.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.02.2026

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 253

vii) In light of the above observation of the Hon'ble Bench the matter has been remitted back for Your Honour's consideration. The documents filed before the H'ble ITAT, though are, all on record, are being filed again, for ready reference. Some of the facts which will have a bearing in deciding the issue are as under. 1

AMEY JAIN,INDORE vs. OFFICER, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 296/IND/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Mar 2026AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshiassessment Year: 2019-20 Amey Jain, Ito 1(1), 127, Anurag Nagar Bh Indore Press Complex, बनाम/ Vijay Nagar, Vs. Indore (Assessee/Appellant) (Revenue/Respondent) Pan: Aqbpj1217D Assessee By Shri Harsh Choukse & Shri Kunal Agrawal, Ars Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 23.03.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.03.2026

Section 194Section 200ASection 201Section 234ESection 253(5)

condone delay, admit appeal and proceed with hearing. 4. Ld. AR for assessee explained following facts of case: (i) The assessee-individual is an NRI. (ii) On 09.05.2018, the assessee purchased a property for Rs. 53,43,000/- from R.R. Jain Infra (PAN: AAQFR9972C). The copy of registered purchase-deed is filed. Page 6 of 11 Amey Jain

KAMLESH KOUSHAL,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 1(2), INDORE

ITA 708/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Mar 2026AY 2017-18
Section 115Section 133(6)Section 142(1)Section 250Section 253Section 272A(1)(d)Section 274Section 69A

9 of 18\nKamlesh Koushal\nITA No. 708/Ind/2025 - Α.Υ.2017-18\nexplanation regarding the source of such money found in\nhis bank accounts, the AO has rightly treated the same as\nunexplained income of the assessee u/s 69A of the Act.\n4.7\nTherefore, the addition on account of cash deposits\nof Rs. 5,62,071/- as unexplained money

DCIT 1(1), INDORE vs. M/S MAA UMIYA AGRITECH PVT. LTD. , INDORE

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 89/IND/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore08 Jun 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanidcit 1(1) M/S. Maa Umiya Agritech Pvt. Ltd. Indore 119, A.B. Road, Aloo Pyaj Mandi, Vs. Indore (Appellant / (Revenue) (Assessee) Pan: Aabcn8230F Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Respondent By Shri S.S. Solanki, Ar Date Of Hearing 11.04.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 08.06.2023

Section 12ASection 138Section 144Section 145

condone delay) and termination of proceedings.” Accordingly, in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in suo- moto cognizance for extension of the limitation, the appeal of the revenue is treated as filed within the period of limitation. 3. The Revenue has raised following ground of appeal: “1. The Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in deleting