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.

20 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 250clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai1,319Kolkata834Chennai728Delhi596Pune568Bangalore497Ahmedabad409Patna333Jaipur314Raipur219Surat214Amritsar188Indore184Rajkot174Nagpur173Hyderabad160Panaji120Chandigarh115Cochin102Lucknow99Visakhapatnam83Agra70Guwahati68Jabalpur35Cuttack31Allahabad27Jodhpur20Calcutta18Dehradun13Ranchi12Varanasi10SC4Himachal Pradesh1Rajasthan1Andhra Pradesh1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 25018Section 15418Section 143(3)16Addition to Income15Section 14814Section 14713Section 143(1)13Section 1112Section 153C12

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

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

ITA 5/JODH/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2018-19
Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

condone such delay 12 CIT v. Bhawani Plywood the filing or furnishing the audit report along with (P) Ltd. (2010) 1 the return of income is directory and not taxmann.com 250 (Hon’ble mandatory. P&H High Court) 13 Sarvodaya Charitable Trust Exemption u/s 11 cannot be denied merely only on Vs. ITO, Exemption (2021) the basis of delayed filing

DUSHKAL GO SEWA SAMITI,SUMERPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), JODHPUR

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

Condonation of Delay9
Natural Justice7
Disallowance5
ITA 9/JODH/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2017-18
Section 11Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 154

condone such delay 12 CIT v. Bhawani Plywood the filing or furnishing the audit report along with (P) Ltd. (2010) 1 the return of income is directory and not taxmann.com 250 (Hon’ble mandatory. P&H High Court) 13 Sarvodaya Charitable Trust Exemption u/s 11 cannot be denied merely only on Vs. ITO, Exemption (2021) the basis of delayed filing

SEEMA PANDIT,MOUNT AU vs. ITO, WARD, MOUNT ABU

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

ITA 160/JODH/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur17 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: The Cit(A) To Rectify The Order. The Cit(A) Has Rejected The Application U/S 154 Vide Order Dated 29.3.2019 & Served The Order On The Assessee On 19.4.2019. After Rejection Of His Application U/S 154, The Assessee Has Immediately Filed This Appeal Before The Hon'Ble Tribunal..

Section 154Section 250(6)

delay of 208 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. 5. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- “i). That

SARVODAYA MINING SERVICES,NIMBAHERA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 438/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Sakar Sharma, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Brij Lal Meena, Addld. CIT – DR
Section 139Section 143(3)Section 145Section 250Section 44A

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in shot, ‘the Act) for the Assessment Year 2017-18, date of order 09/03/2024. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Learned Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur (in short, ‘Ld.AO’) passed under section 143(3) of the Act, date of order 17/12/2018. 2. The appeal was filed

MOHAMMAD YASEER,BARDEZ GOA vs. ITO, WARD-2, MAKRANA

In the result, all the appeals bearing ITAs No

ITA 345/JODH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur20 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 250

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter, ‘the Act’). All the impugned orders are emanated from the orders of the Ld.AO, the details of which are given below:- I.T.A Number A.Y. CIT(A)’s order Assessing Officer Section under which date order is passed & dt of order 345/Jodh/2024 2015-16 28/03/2023 ITO, Ward 2, U/s 143(3), DO Makrana

KAILASH CHANDRA MOONDRA ,SUMERPUR vs. ITO,, SUMERPUR

In the result, ITA No. 334/Jodh/2019 is allowed for statistical purpose and

ITA 339/JODH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur10 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 202Section 250Section 250(6)

delay for 240 days of the assessee is duly condoned. 3. In the outset, one appeal of the assessee is filed against the appeal order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Act and another appeal against the order which was passed u/s 154 related to rectification of the main appeal order for the impugned assessment year. The issue of both

KAILASH CHANDRA MOONDRA ,SUMERPUR vs. ITO,, SUMERPUR

In the result, ITA No. 334/Jodh/2019 is allowed for statistical purpose and

ITA 334/JODH/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur10 Nov 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 147Section 148Section 154Section 202Section 250Section 250(6)

delay for 240 days of the assessee is duly condoned. 3. In the outset, one appeal of the assessee is filed against the appeal order passed u/s 250 (6) of the Act and another appeal against the order which was passed u/s 154 related to rectification of the main appeal order for the impugned assessment year. The issue of both

SANTOSH SHARMA,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), JODHPUR

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

ITA 859/JODH/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur18 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: The Tribunal. The Assessee Has Moved A Condonation Petition Explaining That The Delay Was Caused Due To Non-Receipt Of Communication From The Earlier Representative, Who Neither Apprised The Assessee Of The Appellate Outcome Nor Advised Timely Remedial Action. It Has Been Further Submitted That Upon Obtaining Knowledge Of The Order, The Assessee Promptly Engaged New Counsel & Has Been Diligently Pursuing The Matter. A Prayer Was Made To Condone The Delay In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Kothari, C.AFor Respondent: Smt. Anuradha, Addl. CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 68

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the Assessment Year 2012–13, whereby various additions made under section 68 of the Act were sustained. 2. At the outset, it is noted that there is a delay of 217 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has moved a condonation

RAMESHWAR SONI,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 742/JODH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 May 2025AY 2015-16
For Appellant: \nShri Rajendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: \nShri Mehul Jangir, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short the “Act”] date of order\n21/06/2024 for AY 2014-15 to AY 20018-19 and for AY 2019-20 date of order\n24/06/2024. The impugned orders were originated from the orders of the\nLearned Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-2, Jodhpur [in short,\nthe “Ld. AO"], passed under section

UMED HOSPITAL MEDICARE RELIEF SOCIETY,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CPC /ITO, EXEMPTION WARDM,, BANGALORE. JODHPUR

ITA 175/JODH/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur06 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 288

250 for AY 2015-16 under the presumption that the assessment order relates to AY 2016-17. The CIT (A) himself observed that the amendments as stated in his order will take effect from AY 2016-17. Thus, Ld. CIT erred in passing the 2016-17. Therefore the appellant appeals for deletion of addition made of Rs. 7200000. 4. That

DHABAN GRAM SEWA SAHAKARI SAMITY,SANGARIA vs. ITO WARD 1 , HANUMANGARH

In the result, appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 771/JODH/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur21 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena, Hon’Ble & Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Hon’Ble

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 80ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(iv)

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short, ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2018-19, date of order 29/03/2024. The impugned order emanated from the order of the Ld.CPC, Bengaluru (in short, “the CPC”) passed under section 143(1) of the Act, date of order 31/05/2019. 2. The appeal was filed with a delay of 120 days. The assessee

ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR vs. ANJANA CONSTRUCTION, CHITTORGARH

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 313/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in shot, ‘the Act) for the Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18, date of order 28/02/2024. The impugned orders are emanated from the order of the Learned Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur (in short, ‘Ld.AO’), passed under section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act, for A.Ys

ANJANA CONSTRUCTION,NIMBAHERA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 453/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in shot, ‘the Act) for the Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18, date of order 28/02/2024. The impugned orders are emanated from the order of the Learned Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur (in short, ‘Ld.AO’), passed under section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act, for A.Ys

ANJANA CONSTRUCTION,NIMBAHERA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, UDAIPUR, UDAIPUR

In the result, revenue’s appeal bearing ITA No

ITA 455/JODH/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur29 Sept 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. Mitha Lal Meena & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Respondent: Shri Sakar Sharma
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153CSection 250Section 292C

250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in shot, ‘the Act) for the Assessment Years 2014-15, 2015-16 & 2017-18, date of order 28/02/2024. The impugned orders are emanated from the order of the Learned Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-1, Udaipur (in short, ‘Ld.AO’), passed under section 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of the Act, for A.Ys

RAMESHWAR SONI,JODHPUR vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 741/JODH/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: the Ld.CIT(A). But due to illness, the assessee was unable to comprehend that the notices of hearing on different dates were issued by the Ld.CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal order was passed exparte and the impugned additions were confirmed. Aggrieved assessee filed an

For Appellant: Shri Rajendra Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT - DR
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 250

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 *in short the “Act”+ date of order 21/06/2024 for AY 2014-15 to AY 20018-19 and for AY 2019-20 date of order 24/06/2024. The impugned orders were originated from the orders of the Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Central Circle-2, Jodhpur [in short, the “Ld. AO”+, passed under section

BHARAT CHATURBHUJ VEDANT,MUMBAI vs. DC, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 430/JODH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: BEFOREDR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 250

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(in short, ‘the Act’)for Assessment Years 2016-17 to 2018-19, the date of order is 07/03/2024, for all the appeals. The impugned orders emanated from the order of the Learned Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, CC-2, Jodhpur *in short the “Ld.AO+, order passed under section 153A read with section

BHARAT CHATURBHUJ VEDANT,MUMBAI vs. DC, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, JODHPUR

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee bearing ITA Nos

ITA 431/JODH/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur04 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: BEFOREDR. MITHA LAL MEENA (Accountant Member), SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajey Malik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 153ASection 250

250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(in short, ‘the Act’)for Assessment Years 2016-17 to 2018-19, the date of order is 07/03/2024, for all the appeals. The impugned orders emanated from the order of the Learned Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, CC-2, Jodhpur *in short the “Ld.AO+, order passed under section 153A read with section

MAHENDRA RATHI,BIKANER vs. ITO, BIKANER

ITA 299/JODH/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur28 May 2025AY 2010-11
Section 147Section 148Section 2(14)(iii)Section 234Section 250

delay in filing appeal is condoned and\nappeal admitted.\n3. Having heard both the sides and perusal of material on record, we find\nthat the Ld. NFAC has rejected the appeal ex parte qua the assessee summarily\nby a non-speaking appeal order without mentioning the factum of service of\nnotices of hearing issued u/s 250

AAMEEN BELIM,JODHPUR vs. ITO, WARD-2(2), JODHPUR

In the result, the ground no

ITA 571/JODH/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur12 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

Section 124(3)(b)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144Section 148Section 250Section 292BSection 69

250 (6) of the Income Tax Act 1961, [in brevity ‘the Act’] for A.Y. 2009-10. The impugned order was emanated from the order of the ld. Income Tax Officer Ward-2(2), Jodhpur,[in brevity ‘the AO’] order passed u/s 143(3)/147of the Act. 2. The assessee has taken the following ground: I.T.A. No.571/Jodh/2018 2 Assessment Year

M/S. KHADI GRAMMODHYOG PRATISTHAN,BIKANER vs. ADIT, CPC / ITO, WARD-1(2), BANGALURU / BIKANER

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 87/JODH/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jodhpur31 Aug 2023AY 2019-20
Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 250(6)

section 250(6) of the Act, it is the duty of the Commissioner (Appeals) to state a point in dispute, record the reasons and pass a speaking order. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. v. Masood Ahmed Khan (2010) 9 SCC 49% and Canara Bank v. V. K. Awasthy