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.

17 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 194A(3)clear

Sorted by relevance

Nagpur100Chandigarh81Cochin37Chennai32Mumbai25Pune22Bangalore22Delhi17Jaipur17Hyderabad16Kolkata13Ahmedabad8Raipur8Surat6Visakhapatnam6Rajkot5Jodhpur4Lucknow3Panaji3Cuttack3SC3Varanasi2Indore1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 201(1)33Section 20123TDS13Condonation of Delay11Deduction10Section 206C9Section 2508Section 1476Section 1486

GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1),JAIPUR

In the result, both the appeal of the assessee are allowed for

ITA 184/JPR/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Vedant Agrawal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

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 and therefore, we admit this appeal. Gobind Chhangomal Sajnani, Jaipur vs. ITO First, we take up the appeal of the assessee

Section 271C4
Section 194A4
Limitation/Time-bar4

GOBIND CHHANGOMAL SAJNANI,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, JAIPUR

ITA 185/JPR/2022[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jun 2024AY 2009-10
For Respondent: \nSh. Vedant Agrawal (CA)
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 253Section 271(1)(c)

condoned the initial delay of 8 days in filing the appeal, noting that the assessee had filed online within the timeline and received communication for physical filing later. For the larger delay of 26 months in the first appeal, the Tribunal observed that the assessee, being an NRI, faced issues with service of notices and orders, and set aside

M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,HURU vs. ITO, TDS-3, JAIPUR

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

ITA 249/JPR/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 247 To 250/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Years :2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S Oriental Bank Of Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Commerce, Tds-3, Post Box No. 56, Sardarsahar, Jaipur. Churu. Tan No. Jpro01610A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/10/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Bench All These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur All Dated 08/01/2019 For The A.Ys. 2013-14 To 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)

3. The nodal officer has kept this order with him in the file to checkup and to consult the counsel for next week. However the march is being the closing Month and in the banks there are so many works in the March, hence due to the heavy pressure of Work of march and Audit in the First week

M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,HURU vs. ITO, TDS-3, JAIPUR

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

ITA 247/JPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 247 To 250/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Years :2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S Oriental Bank Of Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Commerce, Tds-3, Post Box No. 56, Sardarsahar, Jaipur. Churu. Tan No. Jpro01610A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/10/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Bench All These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur All Dated 08/01/2019 For The A.Ys. 2013-14 To 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)

3. The nodal officer has kept this order with him in the file to checkup and to consult the counsel for next week. However the march is being the closing Month and in the banks there are so many works in the March, hence due to the heavy pressure of Work of march and Audit in the First week

M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,HURU vs. ITO, TDS-3, JAIPUR

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

ITA 248/JPR/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 247 To 250/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Years :2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S Oriental Bank Of Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Commerce, Tds-3, Post Box No. 56, Sardarsahar, Jaipur. Churu. Tan No. Jpro01610A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/10/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Bench All These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur All Dated 08/01/2019 For The A.Ys. 2013-14 To 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)

3. The nodal officer has kept this order with him in the file to checkup and to consult the counsel for next week. However the march is being the closing Month and in the banks there are so many works in the March, hence due to the heavy pressure of Work of march and Audit in the First week

M/S. ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE,HURU vs. ITO, TDS-3, JAIPUR

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

ITA 250/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur06 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita No. 247 To 250/Jp/2020 Fu/Kzkj.K O"Kz@Assessment Years :2013-14 To 2016-17 M/S Oriental Bank Of Cuke I.T.O., Vs. Commerce, Tds-3, Post Box No. 56, Sardarsahar, Jaipur. Churu. Tan No. Jpro01610A Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By : Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv) Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.Cit) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 14/09/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 06/10/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Bench All These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-3, Jaipur All Dated 08/01/2019 For The A.Ys. 2013-14 To 2016-17 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Shravan Kumar Gupta (Adv)For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl.CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)

3. The nodal officer has kept this order with him in the file to checkup and to consult the counsel for next week. However the march is being the closing Month and in the banks there are so many works in the March, hence due to the heavy pressure of Work of march and Audit in the First week

MEHAR CHAND GUPTA,ALWAR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, ALWAR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 27/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur08 Mar 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Itat & The Delay Occurred May Kindly Be Condoned.

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT
Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 194ASection 5Section 56

condonation of delay in filing the appeal is allowed. 4.0 The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:- 1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law as well on the facts and circumstances of the case in dismissing the appeal on the ground of non maintainable since no order u/s 143(1) was filed. Further

BANK OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. ACIT, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 68/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok KanodiyaFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)

delay of 782 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 and therefore the same is condoned. 5. Before moving towards the facts

BANK OF INDIA,JAIPUR vs. CIT FACLESS, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA no

ITA 17/JPR/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Ashok KanodiyaFor Respondent: Sh. Gautam Singh Choudhary, Addl. CIT
Section 201Section 201(1)

delay of 782 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 and therefore the same is condoned. 5. Before moving towards the facts

ZILA PARISHAD,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, KOTA

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

ITA 224/JPR/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Jun 2022AY 2019-20
For Appellant: Sh. Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Sh. A. S. Nehara (Addl. CIT)
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 249(2)

condone the delay. At the time of hearing, the ld. A/R drawn our attention to assessee’s paper book page 9 wherein vide Notification No. 26/2019/F. No. 275/15/2018-IT(B) dated 20th March, 2019 the CBDT has granted exemption from TDS under section 194A(3

ZILA PARISHAD,BARAN vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER TDS, KOTA

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

ITA 148/JPR/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 May 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Manish Agarwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Runi Pal, Addl. CIT
Section 194A(3)(iii)Section 201Section 250

condone the delay. At the time of hearing, the ld. A/R drawn our attention to assessee’s paper book page 9 wherein vide Notification No. 26/2019/F. No. 275/15/2018-IT(B) dated 20th March, 2019 the CBDT has granted exemption from TDS under section 194A(3

DROPTI DEVI,BEHROR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(3), ALAWAR, ALWAR

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

ITA 1223/JPR/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur07 May 2025AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Vedant Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Gautam Singh Choudhary, JCIT-DR
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 194ASection 250

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us. 3. The brief facts of the case are that an information was in possession with the Income-tax Department that the assessee has deposited a sum of Rs. 4,00,000/- in her bank account and got receipt under section 194A

ORIENTAL BANK OF COMMERCE RUHS BRANCH,JAIPUR vs. JT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS) JAIPUR, JAIPUR

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

ITA 480/JPR/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Oct 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh SharmaFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT
Section 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 271C

section 271C amounting to Rs. 2,67,763/- being equivalent to the amount of tax. 2. Under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (Appeals) NFAC has erred in not allowing relief against penalty order passed by AO imposing the penalty amounting to Rs. 2 Oriental Bank of Commerce RUHS Branch 2,67,763/- without waiting

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN PROP. MS BAJAJ RE ROLLING MILLS,KOTA vs. ITO(TDS), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are disposed off accordingly

ITA 592/JPR/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 250

condoned in as much as the main thrust of sub-section 1A of section 206C is to make a Manoj Kumar Jain, kota. declaration as prescribed, upon which, the liability to collect tax at source under sub- section (1) would not apply. When there was no dispute about such a declaration being filed in a prescribed format and there

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN PROP. MS BAJAJ RE ROLLING MILLS,KOTA vs. ITO(TDS), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are disposed off accordingly

ITA 593/JPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 250

condoned in as much as the main thrust of sub-section 1A of section 206C is to make a Manoj Kumar Jain, kota. declaration as prescribed, upon which, the liability to collect tax at source under sub- section (1) would not apply. When there was no dispute about such a declaration being filed in a prescribed format and there

MANOJ KUMAR JAIN, PROP. MS BAJAJ RE ROLLING MILLS,KOTA vs. ITO(TDS), KOTA, KOTA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are disposed off accordingly

ITA 591/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 Dec 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM & HON’BLE SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal, CAFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra (Addl. CIT)
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 206CSection 206C(1)Section 250

condoned in as much as the main thrust of sub-section 1A of section 206C is to make a Manoj Kumar Jain, kota. declaration as prescribed, upon which, the liability to collect tax at source under sub- section (1) would not apply. When there was no dispute about such a declaration being filed in a prescribed format and there

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. MOTION EDUCATION PVT. LTD., KOTA

In the result, the appeals of the revenue stands dismissed, and the

ITA 472/JPR/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.472 & 455/JP/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 & 2018-19 DCIT, Central Circle, Kota बनाम Vs. Motion Education Limited, 394, Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Kota Private स्थायी लेखा सं. / जीआईआर सं./PAN/GIR No.: AAICM4637L अपीलार्थी / Appellant प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent Motion Limited, CO. Nos.20 & 21/JP/2025 (Arising out of ITA. Nos.472 & 455/JP/2025) निर्धारण वर्ष / Assessment Years : 2017-18 &

For Appellant: Mrs. Raksha Birla CA (V.C)For Respondent: Mrs. Anita Rinesh, JCIT-DR
Section 153A

Delay condoned. 2. Leave granted. This two sentence order establishes the application of mind of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. The application of mind is the whole process through which the all the facts and questions of law has been considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court and the order is just conclusion of the whole process of application