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.

73 results for “condonation of delay”+ TDSclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai996Pune711Mumbai650Patna614Delhi601Bangalore491Hyderabad368Kolkata293Nagpur262Raipur212Cochin209Jaipur200Chandigarh160Ahmedabad145Visakhapatnam116Cuttack103Lucknow73Surat63Karnataka54Indore52Rajkot35Amritsar34Dehradun25Jodhpur24Kerala23Allahabad19Guwahati18Panaji16Agra15Ranchi11Jabalpur10Varanasi9SC7Telangana2Rajasthan1Calcutta1

Key Topics

Section 206C110TDS57Condonation of Delay43Section 234E33Limitation/Time-bar30Addition to Income29Section 1128Natural Justice25Deduction

VIL LIMITED,LUCKNOW. vs. DY. COMMISIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW., LUCKNOW

In the result, these three appeals are dismissed

ITA 91/LKW/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

delay in allowing credit of TDS a mount and consequential refund to the appellant on account of mismatch that is not attributable to the appellant entitles the appellant for payment of refund and also interest thereon. 10. Because, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in rejecting the appeal of the assessee as the assessee company underwent CIRP Proceeding

VIL LIMITED,LUCKNOW. vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW.

In the result, these three appeals are dismissed

ITA 88/LKW/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Sept 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

delay in allowing credit of TDS a mount and consequential refund to the appellant on account of mismatch that is not attributable to the appellant entitles the appellant for payment of refund and also interest thereon. 10. Because, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in rejecting the appeal of the assessee as the assessee company underwent CIRP Proceeding

Showing 1–20 of 73 · Page 1 of 4

24
Section 26323
Section 143(3)20
Section 25019

VIL LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-6, LUCKNOW.

In the result, these three appeals are dismissed

ITA 90/LKW/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow12 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

delay in allowing credit of TDS a mount and consequential refund to the appellant on account of mismatch that is not attributable to the appellant entitles the appellant for payment of refund and also interest thereon. 10. Because, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in rejecting the appeal of the assessee as the assessee company underwent CIRP Proceeding

SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT JAIL,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

In the result, for statistical purposes, both the appeals are treated as allowed

ITA 252/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Feb 2020AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Shailendra Misra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

TDS), Bareilly under section 200A of the Act. In both the cases, there was a delay of 367 days each in filing of the appeals before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee moved applications for condonation

SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT JAIL,SHAHJAHANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILLY

In the result, for statistical purposes, both the appeals are treated as allowed

ITA 253/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Feb 2020AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Shailendra Misra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Ajay Kumar, D.R
Section 200ASection 234E

TDS), Bareilly under section 200A of the Act. In both the cases, there was a delay of 367 days each in filing of the appeals before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee moved applications for condonation

M/S MODEL EXIM,KANPUR vs. THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL), KANPUR

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 137/LKW/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow05 Nov 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anadee Nath Misshra & Shri Subhash Malguriam/S. Model Exim Pcit (Central) V. 624-C, Defence Colony, 7/81-B, Tilak Nagar, Jajmau, Kanpur-208010. Kanpur. Pan:Aadfm6163H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. Respondent By: Smt Namita S. Pandey, Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing: 29 10 2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 05 11 2024 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Swaran Singh, C.AFor Respondent: Smt Namita S. Pandey, CIT(DR)
Section 139Section 153CSection 153DSection 263Section 263(1)

condone the delay in filing of appeal before us and admit the appeal for adjudication. 7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a firm engaged in the business of manufacturing and export of finished leather and sale of license. The assessee company had filed its Page 9 of 24 return of income

SHRI RAMESH SINGH RANA,LUCKNOW vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-4, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 576/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Lucknow17 Apr 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshraआयकर अपील सं/ Ita No.576/Lkw/2019 "नधा"रण वष"/ Assessment Year: 2012-13 Shri Ramesh Singh Rana V. Dcit Range-4 3-B, Talkatora Road, Rajaji 5-Ashok Marg, Aaykar Puram, Lucknow-226017. Bhawan, Lucknow- 226001. Pan:Aggpr0749B अपीलाथ"/(Appellant) ""यथ"/(Respondent) अपीलाथ" "क और से/Appellant By: None ""यथ" "क और से /Respondent By: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl. Cit(Dr) सुनवाई "क तार"ख / Date Of Hearing: 08 04 2025 घोषणा "क तार"ख/ Date Of 17 04 2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / O R D E R Per Anadee Nath Misshra, A.M.: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee, Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Lucknow Dated 11.06.2019, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: -

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Krishna Sharma, Addl
Section 133(3)Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 145(3)

condone the delay in filing of this appeal and admit the appeal for decision on merits. 3. In this case, assessment order dated 29/03/2015 was passed by the Assessing Officer (“AO”, for short), u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”, for short) whereby the assessee’s total income was assessed at Rs.1

MANOJ DWIVEDI,LUCKNOW vs. ITO-3(1), LUCKNOW

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

ITA 619/LKW/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow15 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI KUL BHARAT (Vice President), SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Amit Kumar, CIT(DR)
Section 143(2)

condonation of delay filed by the appellant in Column 13 of Form 35, is as below: - "The Email given in the profile at CPC portal was of an employee with one of Companies in which appellant was director who had left employment and the offices of the companies were also closed due to sickness. The appellant was also medically unwell

NEYVELI UTTAR PRADESH POWER LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. ITO - 2(1), LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 153/LKW/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Venkat Ramanan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 250

delay in filing of the appeals. 5. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the action of the Addl/JCIT(A)-9, Delhi by raising the following common grounds of appeal: 1. The Order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT (A) ought not to have dismissed the application for condonation at the threshold itself without considering the fact that the Appellant

NEYVELI UTTAR PRADESH POWER LIMITED,LUCKNOW vs. ITO - 2(1), LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 151/LKW/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri. Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Nikhil Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Venkat Ramanan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Rajwanshi, D.R
Section 143(1)Section 250

delay in filing of the appeals. 5. Now, the assessee has approached this Tribunal challenging the action of the Addl/JCIT(A)-9, Delhi by raising the following common grounds of appeal: 1. The Order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT (A) ought not to have dismissed the application for condonation at the threshold itself without considering the fact that the Appellant

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBEWELL DIVISION,BARABANKI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-II, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 104/LKW/2021[2015-2016(26 Q - Q1)]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

condoned the delay and ld. AR was asked to proceed with his argument. 4. Since a common issue relating to levy of fees u/s. 234E of the Act is involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Notice in this case was sent to the assessee. Common grounds involved

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBEWELL DIVISION,BARABANKI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-II, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 105/LKW/2021[2015-2016 (26 Q - Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

condoned the delay and ld. AR was asked to proceed with his argument. 4. Since a common issue relating to levy of fees u/s. 234E of the Act is involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Notice in this case was sent to the assessee. Common grounds involved

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBEWELL DIVISION ,BARABANKI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-II, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 107/LKW/2021[2015-2016 (26 Q - Q 4)]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

condoned the delay and ld. AR was asked to proceed with his argument. 4. Since a common issue relating to levy of fees u/s. 234E of the Act is involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Notice in this case was sent to the assessee. Common grounds involved

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBEWELL DIVISION,BARABANKI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-II, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 103/LKW/2021[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

condoned the delay and ld. AR was asked to proceed with his argument. 4. Since a common issue relating to levy of fees u/s. 234E of the Act is involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Notice in this case was sent to the assessee. Common grounds involved

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, TUBEWELL DIVISION,BARABANKI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER(TDS)-II, LUCKNOW

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 106/LKW/2021[2015-2016 (26 Q - Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Nov 2022

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 200ASection 220(2)Section 234E

condoned the delay and ld. AR was asked to proceed with his argument. 4. Since a common issue relating to levy of fees u/s. 234E of the Act is involved in all these appeals, they are being disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. Notice in this case was sent to the assessee. Common grounds involved

TIMECITY REAL ESTATES(INDIA) LIMTED,LUCKNOW vs. PCIT-1, LUCKNOW, LUCKNOW

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

ITA 67/LKW/2021[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow30 Aug 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoorassessment Year:2015-2016

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

delay was condoned and both parties were heard. 3. Learned counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submitted that the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and in the assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer had made certain additions and against which the assessee had filed appeal before learned CIT(A) and when the appeal of the assessee

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 363/LKW/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Dec 2020AY 2010-11

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

Section 206C

condone the delay since the same got occasioned on account of bonafide reasons beyond the control of the assessee and that there is no malafide in not preferring the appeal within rime. 6. BECAUSE, on the fads and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), sustaining the order of ITO (TDS

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 362/LKW/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Dec 2020AY 2009-10

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

Section 206C

condone the delay since the same got occasioned on account of bonafide reasons beyond the control of the assessee and that there is no malafide in not preferring the appeal within rime. 6. BECAUSE, on the fads and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), sustaining the order of ITO (TDS

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 368/LKW/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Dec 2020AY 2015-16

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

Section 206C

condone the delay since the same got occasioned on account of bonafide reasons beyond the control of the assessee and that there is no malafide in not preferring the appeal within rime. 6. BECAUSE, on the fads and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), sustaining the order of ITO (TDS

THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT MINING OFFICER,PILIBHIT vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), BAREILY

In the result, the appeals of the assessee stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 365/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

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

Section 206C

condone the delay since the same got occasioned on account of bonafide reasons beyond the control of the assessee and that there is no malafide in not preferring the appeal within rime. 6. BECAUSE, on the fads and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), sustaining the order of ITO (TDS