Search: condonation of delay

27 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 119clear

Sorted by relevance

Key Topics

Section 14A40 Section 119(2)(b)26 Section 139(1)19 Condonation of Delay18 Section 15414 Section 12A13 Exemption12 Section 11911 Section 143(1)11 Rectification u/s 1549 Addition to Income9 Section 80I8

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

delay in filing of Form 10B and condonation thereof vis a vis the circulars issued by CBDT in exercise of powers vested under section 119

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

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)

condonation of delay, the amount accumulated or set apart had been invested or deposited by the Assessee in the forms or modes specified in section 11(5) of the Act and, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) was correct in relying on the order dated 19.2.2019 passed under section 119

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

condoning delay in such cases. The intention of legislature with respect to such cases is very clear that the remedy in such situation lies in the section 119

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)

section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay in filing of Form 10-B by the appellant for assessment years

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)

section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay in filing of Form 10-B by the appellant for assessment years

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)

section 119(2)(b) for condonation of delay in filing of Form 10-B by the appellant for assessment years

SYED MOHAMMAD MAYAR HUSAIN RIZVI,PANCHKULA vs. ADIT, CPC, BANGALURU, BANGALURU

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

ITA 89/LKW/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow26 Aug 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)Section 249(3)Section 253(3)

119(2)(b) of the Act before the learned CIT(A), copy of which is placed at pages 30 to 38 of the paper book. However, the request of the assessee for condonation of delay was not considered favourably by the learned CIT(A) and the assessee’s appeal was dismissed treating the same as inadmissible on I.T.A. No.89/Lkw/2025 Assessment

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)

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

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

delay in filing of Form 10 u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. Learned counsel for the assessee in this respect invited our attention to appeal in I.T.A. No.191 where the order u/s 119(2)(b) has been passed by learned CIT (Exemptions) vide order dated 20/02/2019. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee I.T.A. No.191/Lkw/2019, 197/Lkw/2018

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

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

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 on application being made by the assessee in terms of the provisions of section 119(2)(b) of the Act and, therefore

CO-OP-CANE DEVELOPMENT UNION GOLA,LAKHIMPUR KHERI vs. ITO RANGE-3(4), LAKHIMPUR KHERI-1

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

ITA 185/LKW/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriaco-Op Cane Development The Income Tax Officer, V. Union Gola Range-3(4) C/O Ayyubi Chamber, Raniganj, Lakhimpur Kheri-262701. Lakhimpur Kheri-262701, Up. Pan:Aaaac1960A (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.A. Respondent By: Shri Manu Chaurasia, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 15 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 24 10 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Shubham Rastogi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Manu Chaurasia, CIT(DR)

Section 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 80Section 80ASection 80P

condoning delay in such cases. The intention of legislature with respect to such cases is very clear that the remedy in such situation lies in the section 119

SHRI RAM GOPAL DOHARE,BAREILLY vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), BAREILLY

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 195/LKW/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow08 Aug 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri T.S. Kapoorassessment Year 2007-08 Ram Gopal Dohare, Commissioner Of Income (Appeal), 63-Akashpuram Pilibhit Bypass, Vs. Aaykar Bhawan, Jagatpur, Kamla Nehru Marg, Bareilly-243006 Bareilly - 243001 Pan – Adord 4122H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 154(7)

condone the delay in filing the rectification application and decide the case on merits. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand, relied on the orders of authorities below. 4. I have heard the rival parties and have gone through the material placed on record. I find that for AY 2007-08, the assessee inadvertently included exempted income

WSG VENTURE PVT. LTD.,KANPUR vs. DCT, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 211/LKW/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow29 May 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Sh. Nikhil Choudharya.Y. 2022-23 Wsg Venture Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Dcit, 1-59, Mig, Word Bank Barra, Circle 2(1)(1), Kanpur Kanpur-208027 Pan:Aaccw7342L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. Cit Dr Date Of Hearing: 21.05.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.05.2025 O R D E R Per Nikhil Choudhary, A.M.: This Is An Appeal By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Pcit-1, Kanpur Passed Under Section 119 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 On 5.12.2024 Refusing To Condone The Delay In Filing The Income Tax Return For The Assessment Year 2022-23 With The Claimed Refund Of Rs. 10,000/-. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under:- “01. That Due To Mistake Of Counsel, The Itr For The Ay 2022-23 Could Not Be Filed Of The Assessee Company, Whereas The Certificate Of The Counsel Was Also Filed, But Ignore The Same & Rejected The Petition Moved U/S.119(2)(B) Of The Act, Which Action Of The Pr. Cit Is Contrary To Fact & Be Quashed. 02. That The Order Passed By The Pr. Cit U/S.119 Of The Income Tax Act Reject The Petition For Condonation Of Delay Moved U/S.119(2)(B) Of The Act Is Not Lawful, Bad In Law, Be Quashed. 03. That The Pr. Cit As Well As Cpc Has Erred On Facts & In Law In Arbitrarily Rejecting The Petition Of The Assessee Company To Rectify The Return Of Income, Which Should Ought To Have Done. A.Y. 2022-23 Wsg Venture Pvt. Ltd. 04. That The Order Passed By The Pr. Cit U/S 119 Dated 05.12.2024 Is Erroneous, Misconceived, Contrary To Facts, Bad In Law & Be Modified.”

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, Addl. CIT DR

Section 10Section 115VSection 119Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 132Section 143Section 144BSection 147Section 153A

section 119 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 5.12.2024 refusing to condone the delay in filing the income tax return

RAMPAL,SITAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, SITAPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 265/LKW/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT (Vice President)

For Appellant: Shri Chandra Prakash Srivastava, AdvFor Respondent: Shri R. R. N. Shukla, Addl. CIT(DR)

Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 3

section 148A dated 29/03/2022 was served upon 80me “Ashish Kumar” on 30/03/2022 (the fact is based on certified information Provided by the Income Tax Officer Sitapur, (copy of the same is enclosed as annexure A). Kindly view the service of Notice on fake identity (ASHISH KUMAR’). The person named Ashish Kumar is neither any family member or relative of appellant

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 588/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

119/- u/s 14A of the Act without appreciating the fact that Section 14A does not use the word ‘income of the year’ but ‘income under the act’ and CBDT circular no. 05/2014 dated 11/02/2014 makes it clear that the expenses, which are relatable to earning of exempt income have to be considered for disallowance irrespective of the fact whether such

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 587/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

DCIT, RANGE-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD.,, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 229/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

Showing 1–20 of 27 · Page 1 of 2