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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 144Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai53Delhi40Kolkata20Bangalore11Mumbai9Pune8Jaipur7Lucknow6Patna6Hyderabad5Amritsar5Cuttack5Ahmedabad4Surat2Chandigarh2Orissa2Dehradun1Indore1Himachal Pradesh1Raipur1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)7Section 2636Addition to Income6Condonation of Delay6Limitation/Time-bar3Section 112Section 234A2Section 682Section 250

RAM DEV CHANDELWAL,S/O SHRI HEERA LAL CHANDELWAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - BUNDI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 585/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Nov 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Or At The Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Poddar (Adv.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl.CIT) a
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 4. The fact as culled out from the records is that the assessee has e-filed his return of income on 09.03.2018 vide ack No. 433729340090318 showing total income of Rs. 6,58,230/- which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. The case

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

2
Section 69A2
Section 253(5)2
Charitable Trust2

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 666/JPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

delay of 178 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 4. Brief facts of the case is that in this case notice

JODHPUR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT (EXEMPTION), JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal in ITA no

ITA 665/JPR/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA No. 665 & 666/JPR/2023 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@Assessment Years : 2009-10 & 2013-14 Jodhpur Development Authority 1, Opposite Railway Hospital, JDA Circle, Jodhpur. cuke Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Exemption, Jodhpur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAALJ 0478 P vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksjls@Assesseeby : Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.) jktLo dh vksjls@Revenue by:

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Ajay Malik (CIT)
Section 11Section 143(3)Section 234A

delay of 178 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause. 4. Brief facts of the case is that in this case notice

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LIMITED ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL JAIPUR , JAIPUR

ITA 922/JPR/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2024AY 2018-2019
For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 115BSection 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 263Section 5Section 69A

delay and the same is condoned.\n8. The brief facts as culled out from the records are that asessee is a company and derives income from retail and wholesale sale of woods, timber, laminates and adhesives and allied activities. A search & seizure operation under section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was carried

SADHWANI WOOD PRODUCT PRIVATE LTD ,KOTA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (CENTRAL) JAIPUR , JAIPUR

ITA 398/JPR/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Oct 2024AY 2019-2020
For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 253(5)Section 263Section 5Section 69A

delay of 41 days in filing the\nappeal by the assessee is condoned in view of the decision of\nHon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, land Acquisition vs.\nMst. Katiji and Others, 167 ITR 471 (SC) as the assessee was\nprevented by sufficient cause in bringing the present appeal with\ndelay and the same is condoned

CHETURAM SUMAN,BARAN vs. ITO-WARD-BARN, BARAN

14. In the given situation, concerned about compliance with the principles

ITA 1530/JPR/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: The Cit(A) Was Also Filed About 174 Days Of The Prescribed Period Of Limitation, But, Ld. Cit(A)

For Appellant: Shri C.P.Chawla, ITPFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 142Section 142(1)Section 144ASection 250

condone the delay in filing of the appeal before this Appellate Tribunal, but, subject to cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) to be deposited in Prime Minister’s Relief Fund. 9. On merits, we find that assessment order came to be passed when the appellant failed to explain the source of cash deposited i.e. Rs.13,00,000/-during demonetization

JAIPAL SINGH,JAIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JAIPUR

ITA 116/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur11 Mar 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Sh. S.R. Sharma, CA &For Respondent: Sh. Arvind Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 115BSection 153A

condone the delay in filling the present\nappeal.\n5.\nBefore moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention\nthat the assessee has assailed the appeal for assessment year 2013-14 in\nITA No. 115/JP/2024 on the following grounds;\n1.\nThat on the facts and in the circumstances of the case Id CIT(A) is wrong,\nunjust