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.

155 results for “condonation of delay”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,520Mumbai1,223Delhi1,145Ahmedabad700Kolkata690Pune682Bangalore513Jaipur437Hyderabad398Chandigarh294Nagpur232Cuttack185Visakhapatnam163Cochin162Lucknow155Surat132Karnataka130Amritsar119Indore112Raipur96Rajkot93Calcutta76Guwahati65Panaji56Patna48Agra46SC39Jodhpur33Allahabad29Jabalpur25Dehradun19Varanasi19Ranchi14Telangana13Orissa4Rajasthan3Punjab & Haryana3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Himachal Pradesh2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Andhra Pradesh1Uttarakhand1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1

Key Topics

Section 12A105Condonation of Delay63Exemption58Section 1155Addition to Income41Section 143(1)40Limitation/Time-bar33Section 1028Section 268A

UTTAR PRADESH WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION MISSION,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed

ITA 360/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Nov 2025AY 2017-18
Section 11(1)(a)Section 143Section 143(2)

delay from the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), and\nconsequently, the \"ld. \"CIT(A)\" was not correct either on facts or in law in upholding\nthe denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act on the ground that the appellant had not\nfurnished any order passed by CIT(Exemption) condoning

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. UTTAR PRADESH WATER SUPPLY AND SANITATION MISSION, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed

ITA 288/LKW/2024[2017]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow

Showing 1–20 of 155 · Page 1 of 8

...
22
Section 69A22
Section 143(2)21
Section 5(2)21
28 Nov 2025

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT\nAND\nSHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)(a)Section 143Section 143(2)

delay from the Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemption), and\nconsequently, the \"ld. \"CIT(A)\" was not correct either on facts or in law in upholding\nthe denial of exemption u/s 11 of the Act on the ground that the appellant had not\nfurnished any order passed by CIT(Exemption) condoning

KRISHI UTPADAN MANDI SAMITI, RURA,RURA, KANPUR DEHAT vs. CPC, BANGALORE ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

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

ITA 102/LKW/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 11Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 5

condonation of the delay in filing of the appeal, the present appeal is dismissed as not maintainable.” (A.1) In the aforesaid appellate order, the learned CIT(A) observed that the appellant had not made any submissions for justifying substantial delay in filing of the appeal. The relevant discussion is at paragraphs 4 to 4.6 of the aforesaid order of learned

M/S U.P HINDI SANSTHAN,LUCKNOW vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 727/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. U.P. Hindi Sansthan. Commissioner Of Income V. 6, Hindi Sansthan, Mg Road, Tax (Exemptions) Hazratganj, Lucknow-226001. T.C. 46V, 5Th Floor, Upsidc Ltd, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow-226010. Pan:Aaaau1297Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of Income V. M/S. U.P. Hindi Sansthan. Tax (Exemptions) 6, Hindi Sansthan, Mg T.C. 46V, 5Th Floor, Upsidc Ltd, Road, Hazratganj, Lucknow- Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, 226001. Lucknow-226010. Pan:Aaaju0103A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Hariom Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 12 11 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 11 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Hariom Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 254(3)

condonation of delay for filing of form no. 10. 3. The order of Ld. CIT(A) be cancelled and the order of the AO be restored.” 1.1 The grounds of appeal of the assessee for ITA. No. 727/LKW/2019 are as under: - “1. That the Ld. CIT(Exemptions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -(EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P HINDI SANSTHAN, LUCKNOW

In the result, both appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 198/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. U.P. Hindi Sansthan. Commissioner Of Income V. 6, Hindi Sansthan, Mg Road, Tax (Exemptions) Hazratganj, Lucknow-226001. T.C. 46V, 5Th Floor, Upsidc Ltd, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow-226010. Pan:Aaaau1297Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dy. Commissioner Of Income V. M/S. U.P. Hindi Sansthan. Tax (Exemptions) 6, Hindi Sansthan, Mg T.C. 46V, 5Th Floor, Upsidc Ltd, Road, Hazratganj, Lucknow- Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, 226001. Lucknow-226010. Pan:Aaaju0103A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Hariom Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 12 11 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 20 11 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Hariom Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 254(3)

condonation of delay for filing of form no. 10. 3. The order of Ld. CIT(A) be cancelled and the order of the AO be restored.” 1.1 The grounds of appeal of the assessee for ITA. No. 727/LKW/2019 are as under: - “1. That the Ld. CIT(Exemptions

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(E), LUCKNOW vs. M/S. VYAVSAYIK PARIKSHA PARISHAD, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 571/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year: 2016-17 Dy. Cit (Exemptions) V. M/S Vyavsayik Pariksha Parishad Lucknow 2, Aliganj Lucknow Tan/Pan:Aaatv9447J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Smt. Abha Kala Chanda, Cit (Dr) Respondent By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 17 08 2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 07 09 2021 O R D E R

For Appellant: Smt. Abha Kala Chanda, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A
Section 11Section 11(1)Section 119(2)(b)Section 121Section 12ASection 13(9)Section 139(4)

condoning the delay in filing of Form no. 10B; that further, the Ld. CIT (Exemptions), as per order u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act, dated

SANT HARAJINDAR SINGH,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICERITO-2(4), PILIBHIT-1, PILIBHIT

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

ITA 565/LKW/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow07 Aug 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshrasant Harajindar Singh V. Income Tax Officer-2(4), Trilok Singh Santpipariya Pilibhit-1 Karam Puranpur, Pilibhit, Uttar Income Tax Office, Near Pradesh-262122. Lic Office, Awas Vikas Colony, Pilibhit, Uttar Pradesh-262001. Pan:Dlmps4218F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 04 08 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 07 08 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, CIT(DR)
Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 249(2)Section 69A

exempt him from the operation of the provisions of 19[{that clause].]” 6.1.3 It is incumbent on appellant that such inordinate delay in filing appeal should be ordinarily accompanied by an elaborate petition showing and explaining cause of appellant not being able to file appeal within Page 5 of 8 period of limitation and praying for condonation

MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL & CULTURE DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,KANPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 652/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Dec 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 44A

delay in filing the Audit Report in Form 10B before the CIT (Exemption). However, the CPC, Bangalore, without condoning the delay

MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,KANPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 653/LKW/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 44A

delay in filing the Audit Report in Form 10B before the CIT (Exemption). However, the CPC, Bangalore, without condoning the delay

MEDICAL EDUCATIONAL & CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,KANPUR vs. ITO (EXEMPTION), KANPUR

In the result, all the three appeals of the Assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 651/LKW/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Kapoor, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Amit Singh Chauhan, D.R
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 44A

delay in filing the Audit Report in Form 10B before the CIT (Exemption). However, the CPC, Bangalore, without condoning the delay

CENTRAL METHODIST CHURCH,LUCKNOW vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 105/LKW/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.R.N. Shukla, CIT DR
Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 2Section 250

delay being condonable as per section 119(2)(b), petition for which is pending adjudication before the CIT(Exemptions), the order

MAA SIDDHIDATRI SEVA SAMITI,LUCKNOW vs. ITO, EXEMPTION WARD, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 80/LKW/2021[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Apr 2022AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 115Section 12ASection 68Section 69A

condonation of delay in filing the appeal, the assessee has submitted as under: 5) Ignorant and naive the Appellant did not / could not however even claim the benefit of Sec 11 in spite of registration u/s 12A and all other matters on record to allow the benefit of sec. 11. 6) After the assessment order dated 26.12.2019 assailed in appeal

M/S ULTRASOUND EDUCATION & RESEARCH FOUNDATION,LUCKNOW vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICE (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 134/LKW/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 May 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 5

Exemption, Lucknow Lucknow PAN-AAATU3896J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Ms. Shweta Mittal, CA Respondent by Shri Harish Gidwani, DR Date of hearing 26/05/2022 Date of pronouncement 31/05/2022 O R D E R 1. These are two appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of ld. CIT(A) both dated 20.10.2021. 2. The ld. AR, at the outset invited

M/S ULTRASOUND EDUCATION & RESEARCH FOUNDATION,LUCKNOW vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 135/LKW/2021[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow31 May 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoor

Section 115JSection 143(1)(a)Section 5

Exemption, Lucknow Lucknow PAN-AAATU3896J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Ms. Shweta Mittal, CA Respondent by Shri Harish Gidwani, DR Date of hearing 26/05/2022 Date of pronouncement 31/05/2022 O R D E R 1. These are two appeals filed by the assessee against the separate orders of ld. CIT(A) both dated 20.10.2021. 2. The ld. AR, at the outset invited

BHALCHANDRA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal in I

ITA 197/LKW/2018[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 154

Exemptions) and he has held that the delay in filing the return of income was not due to genuine I.T.A. No.191/Lkw/2019, 197/Lkw/2018 3 I.T.A. No.230/Lkw/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 reason and therefore, has rightly held that the delay cannot be condoned

BHALCHANDRA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,LUCKNOW vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTIONS), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal in I

ITA 230/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 154

Exemptions) and he has held that the delay in filing the return of income was not due to genuine I.T.A. No.191/Lkw/2019, 197/Lkw/2018 3 I.T.A. No.230/Lkw/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 reason and therefore, has rightly held that the delay cannot be condoned

BHALCHANDRA EDUCATIONAL TRUST,LUCKNOW vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal in I

ITA 191/LKW/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 May 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

Section 11Section 11(2)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139Section 139(1)Section 154

Exemptions) and he has held that the delay in filing the return of income was not due to genuine I.T.A. No.191/Lkw/2019, 197/Lkw/2018 3 I.T.A. No.230/Lkw/2019 Assessment Year:2016-17 reason and therefore, has rightly held that the delay cannot be condoned

ARPIT KUMAR TOMAR,UTTAR PRADESH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 250/LKW/2023[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Feb 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraassessment Year: 2019-20 Arpit Kumar Tomar Income Tax Officer V. Flat No.B3, B21, Krishna 6(1), Lucknow, Uttar Garden, Sadarpur, Ghaziabad, Pradesh. Uttar Pradesh-201021. Pan:Ajbpt8004B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri V. Balaji, Fca Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 13 02 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 02 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri V. Balaji, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

exemption etc. after expiry of the period specified under the Act; and to deal with the same on merit in accordance with law. 20. Having noticed the above, we may now examine Circular No.2/2020 dated 03.01.2020 issued by the CBDT. The subject of the circular is condonation of delay

CHARAK HELTH CARE & RURAL DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT-CC-2, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 412/LKW/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: SH. SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Suyash Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Vachaspati Tripathi, CIT DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 234ASection 250

delay condonation and filed the audit report in Form No. 10B on 30.08.2022 vide Acknowledgment No. 459721360310822 when the functionality became available. Though the intimation was not available with the assessee, but it appeared that its income had been computed at Rs. 3,82,80,430/- and it was submitted that the action of the CPC was wholly erroneous

KASHYAP DIVYA JYOTI SEWA SOCIETY,SONEBHADRA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION(, LUCKNOW

In the result, all three appeals are dismissed

ITA 66/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SH. KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT AND SH. NIKHIL CHOUDHARY (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT (DR)
Section 119Section 119(2)(b)

Exemption) rejecting the applications of the assessee under section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay in filing of Form