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.

39 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 92clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai376Chennai313Delhi220Kolkata189Ahmedabad152Bangalore127Karnataka125Jaipur112Chandigarh96Hyderabad95Pune84Calcutta41Indore39Surat33Visakhapatnam28Nagpur25Rajkot22Guwahati19Patna19Lucknow18Amritsar17SC11Cuttack11Cochin11Telangana8Raipur6Allahabad6Agra4Rajasthan4Jabalpur3Dehradun3Orissa2Varanasi2Jodhpur1Andhra Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Panaji1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Condonation of Delay28Section 143(3)26Section 201(1)25Section 13124Addition to Income16Section 234E12Limitation/Time-bar11TDS10Deduction

C.I. FINLEASE PRIVATE LIMITED,BHOPAL vs. DCIT-1(1), BHOPAL

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 396/IND/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore06 Jun 2025AY 2012-13
For Appellant: C.I. Finlease Private Limited, Bhopal (PAN: AABCC6164B)
Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

92:\n'13. This Court in the case of Basawaraj v. Special Land Acquisition\nOfficer while rejecting an application for condonation of delay for lack of\nsufficient cause has concluded in Paragraph 15 as follows:\n\"15. The law on the issue can be summarised to the effect that\nwhere a case has been presented in the court beyond limitation

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE ACIT, 1(2), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 247/IND/2023[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Indore

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

10
Penalty10
Section 2639
Section 253(5)8
23 Jan 2024
AY 2010-2011

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

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

section 253(5) of the Act which empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time. We are also conscious of the landmark judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others

M/S C.I. BUILDERS PVT. LTD.,BHOPAL vs. THE DCIT 1(1), BHOPAL

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 248/IND/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jan 2024AY 2012-13

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

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

section 253(5) of the Act which empowers the ITAT to admit an appeal after expiry of prescribed time, if there is a “sufficient cause” for not presenting appeal within prescribed time. We are also conscious of the landmark judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition Vs Mst. Katiji and others

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

condoned and these appeals are admitted and heard. 6. The assessee is aggrieved by the late fee imposed by AO u/s 234E for delay filing of Statements of TDS in Form No. 24Q. Admittedly, the Statements relate to Quarter-2 and Quarter-3 of Financial Year 2012-13 and the assessee is claiming that prior to 01.06.2015, there

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

condoned and these appeals are admitted and heard. 6. The assessee is aggrieved by the late fee imposed by AO u/s 234E for delay filing of Statements of TDS in Form No. 24Q. Admittedly, the Statements relate to Quarter-2 and Quarter-3 of Financial Year 2012-13 and the assessee is claiming that prior to 01.06.2015, there

M/S RANA & JOSHI BUILDTECH P LTD,INDORE vs. THE PCIT-1, BHOPAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 229/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanim/S. Rana & Joshi Buildtech Pr. Cit-1 Pvt. Ltd. Bhopal (Formerly Known As M/S Rana Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. ) Vs. 218 Civil Lines, Below Dainik Bhaskar Office Vidisha (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aafcr9858P Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal Ar Revenue By Shri Ram Kumar Yadav, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 11.09.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26 .09.2024

Section 143(3)Section 263Section 271E

delay in filing the appeal is condoned. 5. The assesse has raised following grounds of appeal: 1.“That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Pr. CIT erred in setting-aside the order passed by the Assessing Officer by invoking the provisions of section 263 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 even

MADHYA PRADESH BHOJ OPEN UNIVERSITY,BHOPAL vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for\nstatistical purpose

ITA 926/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253

Section 253 of\nthe Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act” for\nsake of brevity) before this Tribunal. The assessee is aggrieved by\nthe order bearing Number ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1069389336(1) dated 04.10.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)\nu/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the\n\"Impugned order\". The relevant Assessment Year

MADHYA PRADESH BHOJ OPEN UNIVERSITY,BHOPAL vs. NFAC, DELHI, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for

ITA 925/IND/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Jul 2025AY 2017-18

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

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

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- 25/1069389336(1) dated 04.10.2024 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act which is hereinafter referred to as the “Impugned order”. The relevant Assessment Year

SITARAM MUCHHALA,MARDANA vs. ITO KHARGONE, KHARGONE

ITA 661/IND/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

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

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 45Section 56Section 57

92,473 are upheld as the appellant has failed to explain the nature and source of the credits and hence did not discharge the burden casted upon him. The appellant's grounds are found to be untenable due to the fact that specific findings in the assessment order have not been controverted by the appellant along with corroborative evidences

SUNIL KUMAR MOOLCHANDANI,BHOPAL vs. ITO,1(2), BHOPAL

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 577/IND/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Indore16 Dec 2025AY 2014-15
Section 147Section 250

condone the delay in filling the appeal,\nreason for the delay is as under:\n1) That, the Appellant is an individual engaged in the business of\nproperty development and has been carrying on such business for\nseveral years. The Appellant duly filed the return of income for the\n Assessment Year 2014-15 on 20.11.2014 in accordance with the\nprovisions

DHARMENDRA KUMAR,KHANDWA vs. ITO, KHANDWA

Appeal is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 521/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Aug 2025AY 2018-19
Section 115BSection 143(2)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 44A

92,745 without giving the credit\nof the withdrawals made from the bank accounts.\n6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and applicable law, Ld.\nCIT(A) erred in sustaining the addition made by Ld. Assessing Officer\nby applying the provisions of section 44AD to the income from contract\nreceipts amounting to Rs.1,03,958 thereby making addition

M/S PHOENIX DEVCONS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT4 (1), INDORE

ITA 281/IND/2021[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

section 253(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, we hereby condone the delay in filing present appeals and proceed to adjudicate on merits. Facts in brief: 6. The assessee filed return of AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 at a total income of Rs. Nil and Rs. Nil respectively, which were originally assessed vide 1st assessment-order dated

M/S PHOENIX DEVCONS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT4 (1), INDORE

ITA 280/IND/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

section 253(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, we hereby condone the delay in filing present appeals and proceed to adjudicate on merits. Facts in brief: 6. The assessee filed return of AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 at a total income of Rs. Nil and Rs. Nil respectively, which were originally assessed vide 1st assessment-order dated

M/S PHOENIX DEVCONS PVT. LTD.,INDORE vs. THE ACIT4 (1), INDORE

ITA 279/IND/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Indore30 Aug 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Ms. Suchitra R. Kamble & Shri B.M. Biyani(Conducted Through Virtual Court)

Section 143(3)Section 254Section 271(1)(c)

section 253(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, we hereby condone the delay in filing present appeals and proceed to adjudicate on merits. Facts in brief: 6. The assessee filed return of AY 2008-09 and AY 2009-10 at a total income of Rs. Nil and Rs. Nil respectively, which were originally assessed vide 1st assessment-order dated

NARENDRA KUMAR MISHRA,BHOPAL vs. ITO-3(1), BHOPAL, BHOPAL

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 233/IND/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2020-21
Section 143(3)Section 253(5)

section 253(5) and the decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court, we take a judicious view, condone delay, admit\nappeal and proceed with hearing.\n4. The background facts leading to present appeal are as under:\n(i)\nThe assessee-individual is a differently-abled person. Originally, he\nwas a permanent employee of Central Govt. in the Department of\nTelecom

INCOME TAX OFFICER 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 502/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Mar 2025AY 2017-18
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 253(5)

condone delay, admit these appeals and proceed with\nhearing.\n3. The background facts leading to present appeals are such that the\nassessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate. For AY\n2017-18 & 2018-19, the assessee filed its returns/revised returns of income\nu/s 139 declaring total incomes of Rs. Nil (with current year loss

VIPUL JAIN,INDORE vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, 5(2), INDORE, INDORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 431/IND/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore29 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanivipul Jain Ito, 5(2) 18, Ganesh Colony, Rambag Indore Vs. Mp (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Agnpj8206E Assessee By Shri S.N. Agrawal, Ar Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 24.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 29.04.2024

Section 69A

delay of 129 days in filing the present appeal is condoned. 6. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal: “1.That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deciding the appeal ex-parte without giving proper opportunity of being heard to the appellant. 2 That on the facts

SHREERAM CONSTRUCTIONS,BHOPAL vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT

In the result we are of the considered opinion that the

ITA 480/IND/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M Joshishreeram Construction, Commissioner Of बनाम/ Shop No.2,New Shri Ram Income-Tax Vs. Parisar, Phase I Khajuri Kala, (Appeals) Bhopal, Bhopal (Pan:Abgfs5939P) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Govind Rinwa, Ca Revenue By Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 09.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 27.02.2026 आदेश/ O R D E R

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 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 and by way of a second appeal. The Assessee is aggrieved by the order bearing Number:-ITBA/NFAC/250/2023- 24/1055303221(1) dated 22/08/2023 passed by the Ld. CIT(A) u/s 250 of the Act, which is herein

INCOME TAX OFFICER INDORE 5(1), INDORE vs. UMANG DEVELOPERS, INDORE

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 503/IND/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Indore27 Mar 2025AY 2018-19
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 253(5)

condone delay, admit these appeals and proceed with\nhearing.\n3. The background facts leading to present appeals are such that the\nassessee is a partnership firm engaged in the business of real estate. For AY\n2017-18 & 2018-19, the assessee filed its returns/revised returns of income\nu/s 139 declaring total incomes of Rs. Nil (with current year loss

DISTRICT ORGANISOR TRIBAL WELFARE BHOPAL,BHOPAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS)- 1, BHOPAL, BHOPAL

In the result appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical

ITA 545/IND/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Indore23 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

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

Section 131Section 194CSection 201(1)Section 26A

condone the delay in filing appeal. 11. The appellant prays to delete the demand of tax and interest or to remand the case in the interest of justice.” 4. The Ld. AR of the assessee has submitted that the assessee acts as a Drawing & Disbursing Officer (DDO) and oversees the welfare programme undertaken by Govt. of Madhya Pradesh