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.

67 results for “condonation of delay”+ Addition to Incomeclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai3,217Chennai3,122Delhi2,712Kolkata2,152Pune1,239Bangalore1,196Hyderabad1,123Ahmedabad1,089Jaipur755Chandigarh551Surat503Indore429Patna390Raipur364Lucknow335Amritsar322Nagpur314Cochin306Visakhapatnam304Cuttack262Rajkot261Karnataka212Agra203Panaji145Calcutta123Guwahati79Dehradun75Jodhpur74Jabalpur67Allahabad54Telangana38Varanasi35Ranchi27SC27Kerala7Orissa6Rajasthan6Andhra Pradesh6Himachal Pradesh3Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Addition to Income60Section 14754Section 14838Condonation of Delay35Section 14429Section 25028Section 69A26Penalty20Section 1119

SARSWATI BAL KALYAN SAMITI,WAIDHAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, JABALPUR

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

ITA 45/JAB/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2018-19 M/S Sarswati Bal Kalyan V. Income Tax Officer, Samiti Mandla Ward, Mandla Waidhan Distt – Singrauli (Mp)- Central Revenue Annexe 486886. Building, Jabalpur- 482001. Pan:Aadas7349Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Dr. Hemant S. Modh, Adv Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura , Sr. (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 23 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 30 06 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Dr. Hemant S. Modh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura , Sr. (DR)
Section 119(2)(b)Section 263Section 69A

addition at Rs.22,28,765/- 2. That the assessment has been set-aside by Ld. CIT, Exemption vide order u/s 263 of IT Act, 9161, dated 09.01.2025, hence, the appeal order passed by NFAC is bad in law and unjustified. 3. That the assessee craves leave to raise any other ground/s on or before the date of hearing to prove

Showing 1–20 of 67 · Page 1 of 4

Cash Deposit19
Limitation/Time-bar18
Section 115B17

AMIT KUMAR YADAV,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SEONI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 168/JAB/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G.N. Purohit, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)

delay should be condoned and appeal may please be considered on merits. 3. That the learned CIT Appeal as well as Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts of the case in making / confirming addition of Rs.35109143/- The cash deposited added as income

AMIT KUMAR YADAV,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SEONI

In the result, the assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 166/JAB/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. G.N. Purohit, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 250Section 271ASection 272A(1)(d)

delay should be condoned and appeal may please be considered on merits. 3. That the learned CIT Appeal as well as Assessing Officer has erred in law and on facts of the case in making / confirming addition of Rs.35109143/- The cash deposited added as income

SPARSH ASSOCIATION OF DEVELOPMENT PROFESSIONALS & CONSULTANTS,REWA vs. ASSTT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, REWA

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed”

ITA 105/JAB/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur14 Sept 2023AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Shri.SapanUsrethe.Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri.Rajesh Kumar Gupta.Sr.DR
Section 11Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 234C

income was determined at Sparsh Association of Development Professionals & Consultants. Rs.11,60,725/-.Aggrieved by the order the assessee has filed an appeal with the CIT(A). 3.The CIT(A) considered the grounds of appeal, submissions of the assessee and findings of the AO but rejected the request for condonation of delay in filing the Form No. 10B electronically

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 158/JAB/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur17 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Dr. H. S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148A

income without any basis is unjustified. 4. That the Additional made at Rs.34,07,561/- considering the filing of Form 10B delayed without considering the notification issued by CBDT for condoning

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 161/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur17 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Dr. H. S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148A

income without any basis is unjustified. 4. That the Additional made at Rs.34,07,561/- considering the filing of Form 10B delayed without considering the notification issued by CBDT for condoning

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 159/JAB/2023[2016-17]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur17 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Dr. H. S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148A

income without any basis is unjustified. 4. That the Additional made at Rs.34,07,561/- considering the filing of Form 10B delayed without considering the notification issued by CBDT for condoning

SHARDA BAL KALYAN SAMITI,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 160/JAB/2023[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Jabalpur17 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat

For Appellant: Dr. H. S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shravan Kumar Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 11Section 115BSection 147Section 148Section 148A

income without any basis is unjustified. 4. That the Additional made at Rs.34,07,561/- considering the filing of Form 10B delayed without considering the notification issued by CBDT for condoning

NAGENDRA PRATAP SINGH,SINGRAULI vs. ITO, SINGRAULI

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

ITA 195/JAB/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Nagendra Pratap Singh V. Income Tax Officer Prop. M/S. Prem Kanta Indane, Itd, Singrauli-486788 Old Dudhichua Road, Singrauli- 486788. Tan/Pan:Asaps8528D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr. Cit(Dr-1) Date Of Hearing: 20 08 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 08 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri N. M. Prasad, Sr. CIT(DR-1)
Section 144Section 148Section 148A

delay in filing of Appeal be kindly condoned. 3. That the order of the learned lower authorities passed are unlawful and illegal. 4. That the various findings of the learned lower authorities are opposed to the facts hence the same may kindly be quashed. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT Appeals NFAC

RAI SAHAB BHAIYALAL DUBEY EDUCATIONAL AND MEDICAL CHARITABLE TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 186/JAB/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur10 Mar 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 11ASection 12ASection 143(1)

addition is disputable one and cannot be dealt under section 143(1) intimation. This proves the order was passed without application of mind and in mechanical fashion. Moreover, the same was also against natural justice and law contents order is bad in law and needs to be quashed. Similar opinion has been held by ITAT Ahmedabad werein it has been

KRISHNA CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ,REWA vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE, KATNI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 204/JAB/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 194CSection 234BSection 234DSection 250Section 270ASection 271ASection 40

condone delay in filing of appeal of only one day and without issuing any notice of hearing under sec. 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) (NFAC) under sec. 250 of the IT Act, 1961 dated 26/07/2024 is contrary

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 149/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

income and therefore, it did not deserve to be given a second chance. He accordingly prayed that the appeals may be dismissed and the additions confirmed. 7. We have duly considered the facts and circumstances of the case. While condoning the delay

BRAHTAKAR KRISHI SAKH SAHAKARI SAMITI MARYADIT,SAHAJPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(2), JABALPUR

In the result, all the three appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 151/JAB/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sapan Usrethe, Advocate & ShFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 80P

income and therefore, it did not deserve to be given a second chance. He accordingly prayed that the appeals may be dismissed and the additions confirmed. 7. We have duly considered the facts and circumstances of the case. While condoning the delay

SUSHIL KUMAR,NARSINGHPUR vs. ITO, WARD, NARSINGHPUR, NARSINGHPUR

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

ITA 20/JAB/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur11 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri, Nikhil Choudharyassessment Year: 2017-18 Sushil Kumar Ito, Ward Narsinghpur V. Main Road,Gandhi Ward, Income Tax Officer Ward, Kandeli, Narsinghpur, Mp- Narsinghpur, Mp-487001. 487001. Pan:Awwpk7164R (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Sapan Usrethe, Adv. Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 22 05 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 11 06 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144Section 69A

addition of Rs.13,38,000/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“Act”, for short). 3. The present appeal is barred by limitation for 46 days. The assessee has filed application seeking condonation of delay

DHANYA KUMAR JAIN,JABALPUR vs. ITO WARD 2(1),JABALPUR, JABALPUR

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

ITA 173/JAB/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2017-18 Dhanya Kumar Jain V. Ito Ward-2(1) 2719, Nagpur Road, Garha, Income Tax Office, Annexe Tripuri Chowk, Jabalpur- Building, Nagrath Chowk, 482001. Jabalpur-482001. Pan:Awdpj1526D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Rahul Bardia, Ca Respondent By: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 17 09 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 18 09 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Alok Bhura, Sr. CIT(DR)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)

delay is condoned on the ground of medical exigency. The appeal is admitted for hearing. Page 3 of 5 5. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that in this case the assessee filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2017-18 through electronic mode on 04.08.2017, declaring total income of Rs.2,50,539/- and agriculture income

ANIL KUMAR GUPTA,REWA vs. ITO- WARD-1, REWA

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

ITA 160/JAB/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 144Section 147Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 253(3)Section 56(2)(vii)

delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing. (C) The facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 27/03/2015 declaring total income of Rs.1,92,700/-. The Assessing Officer processed the return and passed assessment order

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 97/JAB/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Hemant S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR & Sh. Shrawan Kumar
Section 115BSection 147Section 270ASection 271ASection 56Section 69A

condonation of delayed as the administrators are arrested and unable to file the appeal in due time during the assessment and appeal proceeding. 2. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to dismiss the appeal without considered the merits of case. 3. That the National Faceless Assessment Unit of Income Tax department has grossly

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 100/JAB/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Hemant S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR & Sh. Shrawan Kumar
Section 115BSection 147Section 270ASection 271ASection 56Section 69A

condonation of delayed as the administrators are arrested and unable to file the appeal in due time during the assessment and appeal proceeding. 2. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to dismiss the appeal without considered the merits of case. 3. That the National Faceless Assessment Unit of Income Tax department has grossly

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 99/JAB/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Hemant S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR & Sh. Shrawan Kumar
Section 115BSection 147Section 270ASection 271ASection 56Section 69A

condonation of delayed as the administrators are arrested and unable to file the appeal in due time during the assessment and appeal proceeding. 2. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to dismiss the appeal without considered the merits of case. 3. That the National Faceless Assessment Unit of Income Tax department has grossly

SEHKARI VIPDAN SAMITI MARYADIT,NARSINGHPUR vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), JABALPUR

In the result, all four appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 98/JAB/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Hemant S. Modh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR & Sh. Shrawan Kumar
Section 115BSection 147Section 270ASection 271ASection 56Section 69A

condonation of delayed as the administrators are arrested and unable to file the appeal in due time during the assessment and appeal proceeding. 2. That the NFAC has grossly erred in facts and circumstances of the case to dismiss the appeal without considered the merits of case. 3. That the National Faceless Assessment Unit of Income Tax department has grossly