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.

108 results for “condonation of delay”+ Exemptionclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai879Mumbai828Delhi736Ahmedabad598Pune553Kolkata405Jaipur372Bangalore294Hyderabad264Chandigarh238Nagpur167Cochin130Cuttack122Indore121Surat112Lucknow108Visakhapatnam105Rajkot95Amritsar94Raipur90Patna49Agra42Guwahati32Jodhpur31Panaji27Allahabad23Dehradun19Jabalpur18Ranchi16Varanasi9

Key Topics

Section 12A83Section 1168Exemption64Section 143(1)58Addition to Income55Condonation of Delay50Section 80P43Limitation/Time-bar37Section 14A

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 108 · Page 1 of 6

32
Natural Justice31
Deduction28
Section 143(3)27
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

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 & 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

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 & 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

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

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 68/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

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

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

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

In the result, all three appeals are dismissed

ITA 67/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jun 2025AY 2016-17

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

CO-OPERATIVE CANE DEVELOPMENT UNIAN, LTD. ,LAKHIPUR KHERI vs. ITO WARD-3(4), LAKHIPUR-1

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

ITA 348/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow02 Jan 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 253(3)Section 80ASection 80P

exemption, deduction, refund, or any other relief under this Act after expiry of the period specified by or under this Act for making such application or claim and deal with the some on merits in accordance with law.” From the above, it is clear that the first appellate authorities have not been entrusted with powers of condoning delay

LALBAGH CHRISTIAN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,LUCKNOW vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 104/LKW/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow10 Jul 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Nikhil Choudharyआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.104/Lkw/2025 ननिाारण वर्ा/ Assessment Year: 2022-23 Lalbagh Christian Educational V. The Commissioner Of Society Income Tax (Exemption) Lal Bagh, Lucknow-226001. 5Th Floor, Tc-46, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Next To Lohia Hospital, Indra Nagar, Luckow-226010. Pan:Aaatl2080P अपीलार्थी/(Appellant) प्रत्यर्थी/(Respondent) अपीलार्थी कक और से/Appellant By: Shri Rakesh Garg, Adv प्रत्यर्थी कक और से /Respondent By: Shri Amit Kumar, Cit(Dr) सुनवाई कक तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07 07 2025 घोर्णा कक तारीख/ Date Of 10 07 2025 Pronouncement: O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 119(2)(b)

Exemptions), Panaji dated 09.01.2025. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - “1. Because the CIT (A) has erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the assessee overlooking the issue of condonation of delay

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(4), KANPUR vs. SMT. SHILPI AGARWAL, KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 163/LKW/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Mar 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraito-3(4) V. Smt Shilpi Agarwal 16/69, Aayakar Bhawan, Civil 7/166(1), Swaroop Nagar, Lines, Kanpur-208001. Kanpur-208002. Pan:Ajfpa9933Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Abhinav Mehrotra, Adv Respondent By: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 26 03 2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 03 2025 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Abhinav Mehrotra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl
Section 143(3)

exempt income in the form of LTCG on sale of shares and the assessee being fully aware of it is also a part of this manipulation. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-l, Kanpur has erred in law and on facts without appreciating the facts that the issue involved pertains to organized scam/tax evasion activity and unique modus

UDAAN SEWA SAMITI,KANPUR NAGAR vs. CPC BANGLORE, KANPUR

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 150/LKW/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow03 Jul 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2020-21 Udaan Seva Samiti V. The Cpc 250/4, Juhi Lal Colony Bangalore Kanpur Nagar Uttar Pradesh Tan/Pan:Aaaau7543F (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 23.11.2023, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-2, Mumbai For Assessment Year 2019-20. 3.1 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Society Registered Under Section 12Aa Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act’). The Assessee-Society Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration Under Section 139(1) On 26.01.2021, Declaring Total Income At Nil. The Assessee-Society Had Claimed Exemption Of Rs.12,97,442/- Relating To The Amount Applied For Charitable & Religious Purposes During The Previous Year. The Central Processing Centre (Cpc) Processed The Return Under Section 143(1) Of The Act

For Appellant: Shri Samrat Chandra, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, D.R
Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 143(1)

condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 6.0 The Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted that the assessee-society is registered under section 12A of the Act and in this case, Form 10B was filed belatedly by the assessee although the original Audit Report in Form 10B had been filed

UTTAR PRADESH CRICKET ASSOCIATION,KANPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), LUCKNOW

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

ITA 229/LKW/2025[N.A.]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow28 Aug 2025

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. N.A. Uttar Pradesh Cricket Association, Vs. The Cit (Exemption), E-23, Kamla Nagar Township, Lucknow Nazirabad, Kanpur-208005 Pan:Aaacu7822R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sh. Rakesh Garg, Advocate Revenue By: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.07.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.08.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Cit(Exemption), Under Section 12Ab(1)(B)(Ii)(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, Rejecting The Application Moved For Registration Of The Said Society Under Section 12Ab(B) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under: - “01. Because The Cit (Exemptions) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Rejecting The Application Moved For Registration Under Section 12A(B) Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961, Which Rejection Is Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law, The Registration As Claimed Be Granted. 02. Because The Cit(E) Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Holding That No Response Had Been Filed To His Letter Dated 11.07.2024 Which Is Incorrect, In As Much As, Response Was Filed On 26.07.2024 Vide Letter Dated 25.07.2024 As Such, Rejecting The Application Without Considering The Submission Is Erroneous, Misconceived, The Order Passed Be Set Aside & Registration Claimed Be Granted.

For Appellant: Sh. Rakesh Garg, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. R.K. Agarwal, CIT DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 154

condonation petition has been filed in which it was stated that the reasons for the delay in the filing of the appeal was that on receipt of the order of the ld. CIT(Exemption