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.

28 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 271Dclear

Sorted by relevance

Jaipur28Pune28Karnataka21Mumbai18Delhi17Kolkata16Ahmedabad15Chennai13Bangalore12Cochin8Visakhapatnam7Hyderabad7Rajkot6Nagpur5Amritsar4Indore3Surat3Agra3Raipur2Guwahati1SC1Chandigarh1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)25Condonation of Delay22Section 271D20Limitation/Time-bar19Section 153A13Section 26313Section 40A(3)9Section 59Addition to Income

RAJENDRA MEENA,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the above appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1006/JPR/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur18 Jan 2017AY 2007-08
For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gogra, CA and Shri S.S. Gogra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR
Section 271DSection 271ESection 5

271D of the Act and other dated 2 Shri Rajendra Meena. vs. JCIT, Central Range, Jaipur 3-06-2016 for the assessment year 2010-11 regarding imposition of penalty u/s 271E of the Act 2.1 During the course of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee prayed for condonation of delay in assessee’s ITA No. 1006 to 1008/JP/2016

NARAYANJI SPICES & PULSES PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

8
Penalty7
Section 2506
Section 685
ITA 812/JPR/2016[2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jan 2017

Bench: The Hon'Ble Itat Against The Order Of The Cit Which Was Passed By Him As Single Order. The Appellant In Form No. 36 In Column No. 3 Mentioned The Reference Of Appeal For Three Years. Subsequently, It Was Realized By The Appellant That The Three Appeals Should Have Been Filed Before The Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gogra, CA and Shri S.S. Gogra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR
Section 271DSection 5

271D of the Act respectively. 2 M/s. Naryanji Enclave (P) Ltd. vs. JCIT, Central Range, Jaipur 2.1 During the course of hearing, ld. AR of the assessee prayed for condonation of delay in assessee’s ITA No. 1003/JP/2016 and 1004/JP/2016 for the assessment years 2008-09 and 2010-11 as under:- ‘’1. That the ld. CIT(A) Jaipur dismissed

JITENDRA MEENA,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 816/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur17 Jan 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gogra, CA and Shri S.S. Gogra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR
Section 271DSection 5

condonation of delay is allowed. 3.1 Apropos assessee's solitary ground for imposition of penalty u/s 271D of the Act in both the appeals, the facts as emerges from the order of the ld. CIT(A) is as under:- ‘’4. I have duly considered assessee's submission and also carefully gone through assessment order and penalty order passed u/s 271D

NARAYANJI GAJAKWALE PVT. LTD.,,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 813/JPR/2016[2007-08, 2008-09, 2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur16 Jan 2017
For Appellant: Shri S.K. Gogra, CA and Shri S.S. Gogra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai, DCIT - DR fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 271DSection 5

condonation of delay is allowed. 3.1 Apropos assessee's solitary ground for imposition of penalty u/s 271D of the Act in both the appeals, the facts as emerges from the order of the ld. CIT(A) is as under:- ‘’4. I have duly considered assessee's submission and also carefully gone through assessment order and penalty orders passed u/s 271D

SMT. MEERA DEVI KUMAWAT,JAIPUR vs. JCIT, RANGE-4, , JAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1201/JPR/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Oct 2021AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Sh. Rahul Sanghi (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (JCIT)
Section 269SSection 271DSection 274

delay so happened in filing the present appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2 Smt. Meera Devi Kumawat, Jaipur Vs. JCIT, Jaipur 3. During the course of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the Appellant is an illiterate individual having income from renting of marriage garden situated at Vijay Bari, Sikar Road, Jaipur. The case

TEJENDRA PAL SINGH SAHNI,KOTA vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL RANGE, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed with no orders as to costs

ITA 23/JPR/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Id. CIT(A)-2, Udaipur on 02.07.2019. The order confirming the levy of penalty was passed by ld. CIT(A)-2, Udaipur dated 18.09.2023 u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The order, as per current practice, was not served on the assessee through post. The said order was also uploaded on e-filing portal of the assessee. Accordingly, assessee was required to file an appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT on or before 17.11.2023, being 60 days from the date of receipt of order. However, the present appea

For Appellant: Shri Rajeev Sogani, CA &For Respondent: Mrs. Monisha Choudhary, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 250Section 269SSection 271D

condonation of delay with following prayer. ‘’A penalty order was passed on 27.06.2019 for AY 2014-15 by ld. JCIT, Central Range, Udaipur levying the penalty u/s 271D of the Act. An appeal against such order was preferred before Id. CIT(A)-2, Udaipur on 02.07.2019. The order confirming the levy of penalty was passed

BALBIR SINGH ,ALWAR vs. ASSISTANT CIRCLE OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 2, ALWAR

ITA 734/JPR/2024[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Feb 2025AY 2014-2015

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Sidharth Ranka, Adv. &For Respondent: Mrs. Swapnil Parihar, JCIT-DR
Section 253(5)Section 271DSection 5

section 5 of Limitation Act in filing of appeal Hon'ble Sir(s), The humble assessee appellant applicant respectfully prays for the condonation of delay of 108 days in the filling of Appeal for the following reason: 1. That the Id. CIT (Appeals) passed his order on 06.12.2023 which was served upon the email Id. ankushchoudhary07@gmail.com which is belongs

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 222/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2017-18
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 283/JPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 217/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 220/JPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 281/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 221/JPR/2022[2016/17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

HARISH JAIN,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 214/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

HARISH JAIN,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 216/JPR/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2016-17
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CIRCLE), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 219/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA,JAIPUR vs. PCIT(CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 282/JPR/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 223/JPR/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2018-19
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

HARISH JAIN,JAIPUR vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 215/JPR/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds

RAM KISHAN VERMA,KOTA vs. PCIT (CENTRAL), JAIPUR

In the result appeal of the assessee in the ITA No

ITA 218/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur25 Nov 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: ShriMahendraGargieya (Adv.)&For Respondent: ShriJames Kurian (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 6days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned in ITA No. 217 to 223/JP/2022, 214 to 2016/JP/2022 &ITA No. 281 to 283/JP/2022. 7. Before moving towards the facts of the case we would like to mention that the assessee has assailed the appeal in ITA No. 217/JPR/2022 on the following grounds