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.

8 results for “condonation of delay”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna467Mumbai181Delhi107Chennai106Bangalore87Pune83Ahmedabad58Kolkata58Hyderabad51Indore38Jaipur36Chandigarh36Lucknow25Nagpur23Cochin23Visakhapatnam19Surat15Raipur14Agra11Rajkot9Jodhpur8Jabalpur8Amritsar7Cuttack6Dehradun4Panaji3SC2Varanasi2Guwahati1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 1110Section 143(1)10Section 12A6Section 2506Section 1476Section 271(1)(c)6Section 234E5Section 1544Exemption

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

rectification under Section 154 of the Act dated 25.1.2019 is also quashed and set aside. The application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioner before the respondent is allowed. 6. The 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

4
Rectification u/s 1544
Condonation of Delay4
Addition to Income4

SHRI NAMIYUN PARSWANATH JAIN, SWETAMBER MANIDHARI TRUST,JABALPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), JABALPUR

In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal by assessee is allowed for statistical purposes”

ITA 100/JAB/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur14 Sept 2023AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Sri Rahul Bardia.CA. ARFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR
Section 11Section 119(2)Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 154

condonation of delay in filling Form.No.10B and same was rejected by the CIT(E) vide order U/sec119(2)(b) of the Act dated 11-09-2020, Further the assessee has filed the rectification petition U/sec154 of the Act and was rejected vide order dated 23- 07-2021. 3. Aggrieved by the rectification order u/s 154

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

154 and 250 of the Act. 2. At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR of the assessee submitted that there is a delay in filing the appeals before the Hon’ble Tribunal and filed the applications and affidavits for condonation of delay. Whereas, the facts ITA Nos. 4,5,6,7 &23/Jab/2023 Administrative Officer Customs & Central Excise, Jabalpur mentioned

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)

154 for making prima facie adjustment while processing return under section 143(1)(a) of the Act i.e. process of dealing with the return is an ex parte process. It is pertinent to observe that whenever any debatable issue is involved an explanation of the assessee is required, then on such issue, no prima facie adjustment in an ex parte

UTTAM KRISHNANI,REWA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , KATNI

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

ITA 182/JAB/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 154Section 249(2)Section 249(3)Section 250(6)

u/s 154 read with section 143(3) of the Act on 24/11/2022 and levied the tax @77.25% instead of 30% as a normal rate by applying the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal against the rectification order in the office of learned CIT(A). Vide order dated 30/09/2024, the assessee’s appeal

I M C OF ITI ,GOTEGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(EXEMPTION), JABALPURAN

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

ITA 99/JAB/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur20 Sept 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Imc Of Iti,Gotegaon, Vs. Ito (Exemption) Annex Bldg, Mission Jabalpur, Chowk, Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh- Madhya Pradesh- 482001. 482001. Pan/Gir No. : Aaaai2999F Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri Rahul Bardia. Fca.Ar Respondentby : Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 13.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 20.09.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: These Are The Two Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) / Cit(A) Passed U/S 154 & 250 Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Rahul Bardia. FCA.ARFor Respondent: Shri Shiv Kumar. Sr.DR
Section 10Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 154

condoning the delay in filling the return of income for A.Y.2010-11 for claiming TDS refund u/sec119(2) of the Act. Further the asseesse has filed the Audit Report in Form. No.10B dated 23-09-2011 with the income tax department ASK centre on 2-07-2013 and the assessee has filed the rectification petition u/sec154

DINESH JAT,SAGAR vs. CIT (A), SAGAR

ITA 195/JAB/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Jabalpur28 Aug 2025AY 2013-2014

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

For Appellant: Sh. Jaiswal Sancheti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

u/s 271(1)(c) is unsustainable in law and facts. 2. Penalty Confirmed Without Establishing Concealment or Inaccurate Particulars The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty under section 271(1)(c) without demonstrating that the appellant had either concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof. The appellant had no willful intent or knowledge

DINESH JAT,SAGAR vs. CIT(A), NFAC

ITA 196/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. Jaiswal Sancheti, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. N.M. Prasad, Sr. DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 251(1)(a)Section 271(1)(c)Section 44ASection 69A

u/s 271(1)(c) is unsustainable in law and facts. 2. Penalty Confirmed Without Establishing Concealment or Inaccurate Particulars The Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in confirming the penalty under section 271(1)(c) without demonstrating that the appellant had either concealed income or furnished inaccurate particulars thereof. The appellant had no willful intent or knowledge