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.

10 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 138clear

Sorted by relevance

Karnataka104Mumbai102Chennai92Bangalore84Delhi82Ahmedabad73Pune65Kolkata51Calcutta36Hyderabad27Jaipur24Indore19Chandigarh18Kerala17Surat13Visakhapatnam10Lucknow10Rajkot8Cochin7Raipur7Cuttack5Nagpur5Patna5Allahabad3SC3Amritsar3Andhra Pradesh2Jodhpur1Orissa1Rajasthan1Dehradun1

Key Topics

Section 80P10Condonation of Delay7Section 139(1)6Section 253(3)6Section 80A5Section 143(1)5Section 12A5Section 80P(2)(a)4Section 143(3)

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 of the Act. 4.2 At this stage, it will be relevant to reproduce the relevant provisions of section 143(1) of the Act which is as under: (a) The total income

4
Deduction3
Disallowance3
Search & Seizure3

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

section 154 that was pending before the ld. CIT(Exemption), it was prayed that the delay may be condoned. After duly considering the circumstances cited, the we feel it is a fit case of the condonation of delay and accordingly the delay of 138

INCOME TAX OFFICER-3(2), LUCKNOW vs. M/S DEV BHOOMI PROMOTERS & DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 116/LKW/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow24 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2012-13

delay was condoned and Learned D. R. was asked to proceed with his arguments. 3. Learned D. R. submitted that in this case the assessee had issued share capital to four companies at a premium and had forfeited the share application money and therefore, the Assessing Officer required the assessee to explain and on examination of the explanation, the Assessing

KUNWAR SINGH,UNNAO vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER-2(4), UNNAO

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 652/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow20 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 115BSection 144Section 253(3)Section 69A

delay in filing of this appeal is condoned; and the appeal is admitted for hearing. (C) The facts of the case, in brief, are that in this case assessment order dated 18/12/2019 was passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 144 of the I. T. Act whereby the assessee’s income was assessed at Rs.11,66,638/-. In the aforesaid assessment

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 349/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

condoned; and the Cross Objection is admitted for hearing, on merits. (B) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT” for short), following paper book were filed from the assessee’s side: 15 17 19 21 (B.1) Further, a consolidated synopsis, common for all the appeals and COs before us, was filed from assessee’s side

ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-II, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW vs. RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY, GONDA U.P.

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 460/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

condoned; and the Cross Objection is admitted for hearing, on merits. (B) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT” for short), following paper book were filed from the assessee’s side: 15 17 19 21 (B.1) Further, a consolidated synopsis, common for all the appeals and COs before us, was filed from assessee’s side

RAKESH KUMAR PANDEY,GONDA vs. DCIT/ACIT (CENTRAL)-2, LUCKNOW

In the result, the outcome of the appeals and Cross Objections are as under:

ITA 351/LKW/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow11 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguria

Section 132Section 253(3)

condoned; and the Cross Objection is admitted for hearing, on merits. (B) In the course of appellate proceedings in Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, (“ITAT” for short), following paper book were filed from the assessee’s side: 15 17 19 21 (B.1) Further, a consolidated synopsis, common for all the appeals and COs before us, was filed from assessee’s side

HARE KIRSHNA FOOD PRODUCTS,MORADABAD vs. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, BAREILLY

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no

ITA 73/LKW/2022[2011-2012]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow21 Oct 2022AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Ramit Kocharassessment Year:2011-12

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263Section 40A(3)

delay has rightly relied upon directions issued by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide Misc. Application No. 21 of 2022 dated 10/01/2022 in SMW(c)3 of 2020 “Cognizance for Extension of I.T.A. No.73/Lkw/2022 Assessment Year:2011-12 6 Limitation” , the relevant extract of the assessee’s condonation application reproduced as hereunder: “Taking into consideration & arguments advanced by learned counsel

SAHKARI GANNA VIKAS SAMITI LTD VIKRAMJOT BASTI,VIKRAMJOT vs. INOCME TAX OFFICER BASTI -NEW, INCOME TAX OFFICE BASTI

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 486/LKW/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow27 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastavaassessment Year: 2017-18 Sahkari Ganna Vikas V. The Income Tax Officer Samiti Ltd. Basti Vikramjot, Basti (U.P) Tan/Pan:Aabas4611B (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: None Respondent By: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R. O R D E R This Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 05.12.2024, Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-3, Bengaluru For Assessment Year 2017-18. 2.0 The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Co- Operative Society Registered Under The Co-Operative Societies Act, 1912. The Main Activity Of The Assessee Was Marketing Of Sugar Cane Grown By The Cane Growers, Who Were Members Of The Assessee-Society. The Assessee Filed Its Return Of Income For The Year Under Consideration On 21.03.2018, Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.1,73,170/-. During The Year Under Consideration, The Assessee-Society Had Received Commission From Sugar Mills On Supply Of Sugar Cane Of Rs.70,16,032/-, Which Was Claimed As Exempt In Terms Of Section 80P(2)(A)(Ii) Of The Income Tax Act

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R.N. Shukla, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 194HSection 57Section 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay in filing of the appeal and admit the appeal for hearing. 6.0 None was present for the assessee when the appeal was called out for hearing nor was any adjournment application moved in this regard. However, looking into the facts of the case, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal ex-parte qua the assessee

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 of the Act. 4.2 At this stage, it will be relevant to reproduce the relevant provisions of section 143(1) of the Act which is as under: (a) The total income