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.

14 results for “condonation of delay”+ Deductionclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,859Mumbai1,727Pune1,265Delhi1,103Bangalore953Kolkata873Patna654Hyderabad613Ahmedabad501Jaipur451Cochin426Nagpur350Chandigarh257Visakhapatnam196Indore184Surat162Lucknow160Raipur149Cuttack148Panaji124Amritsar118Karnataka114Rajkot88Jodhpur49Agra42Dehradun38Guwahati36Allahabad36Calcutta34SC32Varanasi23Telangana23Jabalpur14Ranchi13Orissa5Rajasthan3Kerala2Punjab & Haryana2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Andhra Pradesh1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 200A10Section 80P10Section 143(1)9Section 1489Section 2508Section 117TDS7Addition to Income7Deduction7Section 234E

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

condonation of delay filed by the petitioner before the respondent is allowed. 6The respondent is now directed to process the return in accordance with law. It is noticed that no assessment is framed and only an intimation under section 143(1) of the Act was issued. No scrutiny could be carried out by the respondent since the audit report under

5
Section 1445
Natural Justice5

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

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)

condone the delay in filing Form 10B. I.T.A. No.186/JAB/2024 Assessment Year:2020-21 9 5.3 As regard appellant’s appeal against taxing the entire receipts instead of taxing the income over expenditure, it is stated that facts involved in the issue is that the appellant had disclosed gross receipts of Rs.1,27,76,341/- in the ITR and claimed expenses

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

deduction under section 80P. However, the ld. CIT(A) noted that the appeal was delayed and the assessee had not brought on record any sufficient reasonable cause for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, by relying on the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Gupta Emeralds Mines (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2023) 156 taxman.com

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

deduction under section 80P. However, the ld. CIT(A) noted that the appeal was delayed and the assessee had not brought on record any sufficient reasonable cause for the inordinate delay in filing the appeal. Therefore, by relying on the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in the case of Gupta Emeralds Mines (P.) Ltd. vs. PCIT (2023) 156 taxman.com

OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT & SESSION JUDGE ,JABALPUR vs. CPC-TDS, KARNATAK

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

ITA 52/JAB/2021[F.Y- 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleoffice Of The District Vs. Cpc-Tds & Session Judge, Centralrevenuebuilding, Districtcourtbuillding, Income Tax Square, Omti,Jabalpur4820001, Napier Town, Madhya Pradesh. Jabalpur-482001, Madhya Pradesh. Tan No. : Jbpo00349G Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rajeev Nema. Adv & Shri S.K Yadav. Adv.Ar Respondentby : Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 18.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 21.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre(Nfac)Delhi/Cit(A) Passed U/Sec 200A(1) & U/Sec250 Of The Act. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal.

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Nema. Adv &For Respondent: Shri.Shiv Kumar.Sr. DR
Section 200A

deducted TDS on salaries and other payments. The assessee for the F.Y 2013-14 in respect of Quarter (Q) 1, 2, 3 & 4 has filed the TDS Office of District and Sessions Judge, Jabalpur. statements/returns with a delay. Whereas the CPC has processed the TDS returns/statements and levied Late Fees u/sec 234E

CHIEF MEDICAL AND HEALTH OFFICE ANNUPPUR,ANNUPPUR vs. ITO-TDS-2,JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 84/JAB/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur21 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleita No. 84, 85, 86, 87, 88 & 89/Jab/2023 (A.Y: 2014-15 To 2019-20) Chief Medical & Vs. Ito, Tds-2, Health Office, Room No. 102, Aayakar Amarkant Road, Bhawan, Napier Town, Annuppur-484224, Jabalpur-482001, Madhya Pradesh. Madhya Pradesh.

For Appellant: Shri.Sapan Usrethe. Adv.ARFor Respondent: Shri.SaadKidwai. CIT -DR
Section 194JSection 201(1)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence are clubbed, heard and consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up the ITA No. 84/JAB/2023 for the A.Y.2014-15 as a lead case and the facts narrated. The assessee has raised the following grounds

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER , CUSTOMS & CENTRAL EXCISE ,JABALPUR vs. ITO (TDS)-2, JABALPUR, JABALPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 4/JAB/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur18 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Shidharth Seth.Adv. ARFor Respondent: Shri.RajeshKumarGupta.Sr.DR
Section 154Section 156Section 190Section 200(3)Section 200ASection 200A(1)(c)Section 203ASection 204Section 234ESection 285

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence are clubbed, heard and consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, we shall take up the ITA No.4/JAB/2023 for the A.Y.2013-14(Quarter-4) as a lead case and the facts narrated. The assessee has raised the following grounds

BIRLA CABLE LIMITED,REWA vs. ACIT,CPC-TDS, BHOPAL

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5/JAB/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur30 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon’Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sapan Usrethe, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Halder, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 250

deduction of tax at source under section 200A of the Act. The CPC has passed order against the assessee under s. 200A of the Act for the Quarters 3 and 4 with regard to TDS and demands for Rs. 60,840/- and Rs.22,890/-, including interest at Rs. 6,516/- and 448/-, raised for the said two Quarters respectively. Aggrieved

PRAGYA SAVITA,JABALPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE 2(1) ,JABALPUR , JABALUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 21/JAB/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur22 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Sh. Kul Bharat & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2021-22 Pragya Savita, Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of 1197-A, Sadar, Modi Bada, Cantt, Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh-482001 Jabalpur Pan:Axyps7485A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Ashok Tiwari, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 20.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.05.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Jcit(A)-2, Vadodara Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Dated 27.10.2023, Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee That Was Filed Against The Order Of The Adit, Cpc, Bengaluru Under Section 143(1) Dated 17.12.2022. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “1. That The Learned Cit (A) Nafc Was Wrong In Law For Not Allowing The Deduction For Payment Of Rs. 56,39,017/- Under Section 36(1)(Vi) On Account Of Employee Contribution Of Epf & Esic Amount. Whereas The Assessee Had Deposited The Employee Contribution Of Epf & Esic On Or Before Due Date For Furnishing Return Of Income Under Sub-Section (1) Of Section 139 Of Income Tax Act, 1961. Employer Is Entitled For Deduction. 2. That The Both Employee Contribution Epf Rs.49,38,777/- & Esic Rs.70,0240/- Total Rs. 59,39,107/-Which Has Been Deposited With A Small Delay Due To Unavoidable Circumstances & Covid-19. Whereas The Assessee Had Deposited The Employee Contribution Before Filing Of The Return.

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok Tiwari, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 36(1)(vi)

deduction for payment on account of employee contribution of EPF and ESIC when contribution had been paid prior to filing of the return. 5. Charges of interest under section 234A, 234B &234C. That the unreasonable high interest charged against the principle of natural justice, the interest U/s 234A Rs.1,60,801.00,U/s 234B Rs.7,81,772.00 and U/s 234C Rs.1

JAIN WARE HOUSE,SEONI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD, SEONI

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 208/JAB/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur24 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Sh. Abhijeet Shrivastava, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Alok Bhura, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194ISection 2(24)(xviii)Section 250Section 69A

deducted under section 194IB of the Income Tax Act and there was also information that the assessee had deposited cash amounting to Rs. 52,56,000/- in his bank account. The assessee had not submitted any information during the course of re-assessment regarding the nature and investments of Rs. 52,56,000/-, other than to say that the same

SHRI VISHAL SETHI,RAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(3), JABALPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed on the aforesaid terms

ITA 57/JAB/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur07 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Nrs Ganesan & Shri Sanjay Aroraassessment Year: 2014-15

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 45Section 48Section 50C

condone the delay of 55 days in presenting this appeal before the Tribunal. 3.1 The assessee’s case is that the impugned order is bad in law inasmuch as the it travels beyond the scope of enquiry for which the assessee’s return of income for relevant year, filed on 6.9.2014, was selected for verification by the issue of notice

JILA SAHAKARI BANK MARYDIT,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD1(2),

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

ITA 231/JAB/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur16 Mar 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Manish Borad""./ Ita No. 231/Jab/2016 "" " " " " " "  / Assessment Year : 2012-13   Jila Sahakari Bank Maryadit, Income Tax Officer, Sahakari Sadan, Wright Town, Vs Ward 1(2), Jabalpur (Mp) Jabalpur Pan : Aaajj 0118 J / (Appellant) / (Respondent)         Assessee By : Shri Neeraj Agrawal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Pd Chougule, Dr $ %&'/Date Of Hearing : 15/03/2018 ! "# $ %&' /Date Of Pronouncement: 16/03/2018 ()*+ "# .//O R D E R , - Per Manish Borad:- This Appeal Of Assessee For Assessment Year 2012-13 Is Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-I, Jabalpur Dated 9Th June 2016 Vide Appeal No.J/Cit/A/I/Jbp/Ito/Ward/1(3)/Jbp/079/2015-16, Arising Out Of Order Under Section 144/143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) Dated 27.03.2015 Framed By The Ito, Ward 1(2), Jabalpur.

For Appellant: Shri Neeraj Agrawal, CAFor Respondent: Shri PD Chougule, DR
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 36(1)(viia)Section 40

condone the delay of 17 days and admit the appeal for adjudication. Jila Sahakari Bank Maryadit Vs. ITO AY : 2012-13 3. Briefly stated facts, as culled out from the record, are that assessee is a Co-operative Society engaged in the business of banking and working as Central Co-operative Bank. Return of income was filed on 30.11.2012 declaring

M/S. VALLABH MARKET,GADARWARA vs. PR. CIT-1, , JABALPUR

In the result, the assessee‟s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 12/JAB/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur29 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora, Hon‟Ble & Shri Manomohan Das, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia, FCAFor Respondent: Shri U.B. Mishra, CIT-DR
Section 263Section 263(1)

delay of 5 days in filing of the appeal which has been condoned by the Tribunal. 2. The brief facts of the matter are that the assessee is a partnership firm consisting of seven partners in the business of builders and developers. It filed e-return of income on 01-10-2016 bearing e-filing acknowledgement Number 476273261011016 declaring total