Search: condonation of delay | BharatTax

Search ITAT High Courts Supreme Court Phrases AI Research History

Filters

Sort by

Assessment Year

Order Date From

Order Date To

Judge Name

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.

127 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 249(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai228 Chennai140 Kolkata127 Chandigarh118 Delhi105 Bangalore103 Ahmedabad100 Raipur71 Hyderabad70 Jaipur69 Surat57 Pune56 Indore53 Visakhapatnam36 Lucknow35 Panaji28 Agra26 Amritsar25 Patna23 Cuttack23 Nagpur14 Rajkot14 Guwahati12 Ranchi11 Jodhpur11 Jabalpur9 Allahabad6 Cochin5 Dehradun3 SC2 Varanasi2

Key Topics

Section 250343 Section 552 Limitation/Time-bar52 Condonation of Delay39 Section 25327 Section 326 Section 24925 Section 143(1)25 Section 263

LOYOLA HIGH SCHOOL,KOLKATA vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), WARD - 1(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 472/KOL/2022[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Mar 2024AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

section 249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal 2

AMALENDU KUMAR MODAK,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER , 50(1), KOLKATA

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

ITA 1367/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: Disposed

Showing 1–20 of 127 · Page 1 of 7

23

Addition to Income23

Natural Justice12

ITAT Kolkata

19 Nov 2024

AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2017-18 Amalendu Kumar Modak, Income Tax Officer, 50(1), Karer Ganga, Laha Bagan, Garia, Income Tax Office, Civil Centre, Vs Garia Main Road, Kolkata-700084, Uttarapan Complex, West Bengal Manicktala, Kolkata-700 067, West Bengal (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aekpm9399G Present For: Appellant By : Shri Indranil Banerjee, Ar Respondent By : Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.11.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.11.2024 O R D E R Per Rakesh Mishra: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Against The Order Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As “The Ld. Cit (A)”] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) For Ay 2017-18 Dated 14.11.2024, Which Has Been Passed Against The Assessment Order U/S 147 Read With Section 144 Read With Section 144B Of The Act, Dated 29.05.2023. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are Reproduced As Under:

For Appellant: Shri Indranil Banerjee, ARFor Respondent: Shri Pradip Kumar Biswas, DR

Section 144Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 149(1)(a)Section 151Section 151ASection 250

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest then can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. "Every day's delay must be explained" does not mean

BISWAJIT ROY,JALPAIGURI vs. ITO, WARD 1(1), , JALPAIGURI

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 866/KOL/2025[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata02 Jul 2025AY 2018-2019

Bench: Him, In Limine, By Not Condoning A Delay Of 436 Days Before Him.

Section 115BSection 250Section 271ASection 69A

section 271AAC of the I.T. Act, 1961, for misreporting of income. 1.3 This addition was made after several opportunities were given by the Ld. AO as detailed on page 2 of his order as under: “The following notices were issued from time to time, with a view to evoke response from the assessee. But the assessee chose

VRINDA ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ACIT,C.C-1(1),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1232/KOL/2023[AAACV9131E]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Honble High Court as well as before the Honble Supreme Court, then

VRINDA ENGINEERS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, CER-1, KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1274/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 1274/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107 -A N D- I.T.A. Nos. 1232/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-2013 Vrinda Engineers Pvt. Ltd.,.......................Appellant C/O. Subash Agarwal & Associates, Advocates, Siddha Gibson, 1, Gibson Lane, Suite-213, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata-700069 [Pan: Aaacv9131E] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,....Respondent Central Circle-1(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan Poorva, 110, Shantipally, E.M. Bypass, Kolkata-700107

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 4

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Honble High Court as well as before the Honble Supreme Court, then

ZULU MERCHANDISE (P)LTD,KOLKATA vs. PCIT 2, KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 380/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 2Section 249Section 253Section 263Section 3Section 5

249 of the Act, which provides power to the Id. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this expression has fallen for consideration before the Hon'ble High Courts as well as before

GIRIK ESTATE PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. I.T.O., WARD 6(2), , KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 170/KOL/2022[2008-09]Status: HeardITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoysarma]

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

249 of the Act, which provides power to the Id. Commissioner(Appeal) to condone the delay in filing of the appeal before the Commissioner(Appeals). Similarly, it has been used in Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and consideration of this 3 I.T.A. No.170/Kol/2022 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Girik Estate Pvt. Ltd. expression has been subject

BOUTIQUE DE FLEUR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 45(2), , KOLKATA

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

ITA 446/KOL/2025[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Aug 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No. 446/Kol/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Boutique De Fleur,………………………………..Appellant Lawgical Consultants, 2D, Bentinck Street, Unit No. A, 3Rd Floor, Kolkata-700001 [Pan:Aajfb1035D] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,………………………….....Respondent Ward-45(2), Kolkata, 3, Government Place (West), Kolkata-700001 Appearances By: N O N E, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Dheeraj, Addl. Cit, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: August 05, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: August 25, 2025 O R D E R

Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 140Section 142(1)Section 249(2)Section 69A

delay for non-filing of condonation petition within the specified time limit before him in conformity with the provisions of section 249(2

DEEPAK SWITCH GEARS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. PCIT, ASANSOL, ASANSOL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 809/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 May 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. No.809/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Deepak Switch Gears Pvt. Ltd….…......................…...……………....Appellant 48/6, Suman Villa, 2Nd Floor, 155, Jessore Road, Kolkata-700055. [Pan: Aabcd1131H] Vs. Pcit, Asansol….....….........................................................…..…..... Respondent Appearances By: Shri A. K. Tibrewal, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri Abhijit Kundu, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : April 08, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : May 07, 2024 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Revision Order Dated 30.12.2022 Of The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Pr. Cit’] Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). The Assessee In This Appeal Has Agitated Against The Action Of The Pr. Cit In Exercising His Revision Jurisdiction U/S 263 Of The Act & Thereby Directing The Assessing Officer To Frame The Assessment Afresh. 2. The Registry Has Pointed Out That The Appeal Is Time-Barred By 158 Days. A Separate Application Of Condonation Of Delay Has Been Filed, Wherein, It Has Been Pleaded That After Receipt Of The Impugned Order Of The Pr. Cit, The Assessee, Through Its Director, Shri Deep Kishan Saraf, Immediately Approached One Shri Pawan Kumar Agarwal, Chartered

Section 253Section 263Section 5

249 of Income Tax Act, which provides powers to the ld. Commissioner to condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Hon'ble High Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme

M/S B.N. DUTTA,JAMSHEDPUR vs. DCIT, CIR. 2, DURGAPUR

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 705/KOL/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Dec 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarmai.T.A. No.705/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/S B. N. Dutta ….…………………………………………………..………….……Appellant Head Office: 518, G Road, Sonari West Layout, Jamshedpur, Jharkhand – 831011. [Pan: Aadfb0648J] Vs. Dcit, Circle-2, Durgapur……..……....….….. ……………….........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri D. Khasnobis, Ca & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri H. Robindro Singh, Addl. Cit - Dr & None Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 05, 2025 & December 17, 2025 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 17, 2025 Order Per Sonjoy Sarma: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against An Order Dated 13.02.2024 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Indore [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Partnership Firm & Engaged In The Business Of Civil Construction & Maintenance Of Civil Structures Inside Stell Plants. For The Assessment Year 2011-12, The Assessee Filed Its Return On 30.09.2011 By Declaring Total Income Of Rs.36,58,080/- & Total Tax & Cess Liability Of Rs.11,30,347/- Was Discharged In Full Resulting In A Refund Of Rs.12,520/-. The Return Of The Assessee Was Processed By The Cpc U/S 143(1) Of The Act On 27.01.2012. The Assessee Did Not Receive Any Information From The Cpc Either Directly By Way Of Service Of Physical Copy Of The Same Or From The Then Authorised Representative Namely Mr. S. N. Gupta. Due To Non-Receipt Of

Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 250

2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 r.w.s. 5 of Limitation Act and hence the appeal sought to be instituted belatedly is hereby rejected. 5.0 Since delay in filing of appeal is not condoned and application for delay condonation is rejected, the case is not decided on merits. In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.” 6. Dissatisfied

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 573/KOL/2023[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 566/KOL/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 567/KOL/2023[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 568/KOL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 565/KOL/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT,CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THARUR BHASKARAN, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 586/KOL/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 574/KOL/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 564/KOL/2023[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT,CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. THARUR BHASKARAN, KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 585/KOL/2023[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit

DCIT, CC-4(2), KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. NALINI BHASKARAN , KOLKATA

In the result the appeal is partly allowed”

ITA 563/KOL/2023[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jun 2024AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

2), Kolkata”. 3. The Registry has pointed out that the appeals are time barred by 248 days and in order to explain the delay, the Revenue has filed an application for condonation of delay. With the assistance of the ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. Sub-section 5 of Section 253 contemplates that the Tribunal may admit