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.

83 results for “condonation of delay”+ Penny Stockclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai83Calcutta60Kolkata58Ahmedabad31Chennai24Lucknow18Delhi16Jaipur15Chandigarh13Surat11Hyderabad10Varanasi5Bangalore5Guwahati5Indore5Cuttack4Pune4Rajkot3Telangana2Patna2Agra1Orissa1Raipur1Nagpur1

Key Topics

Section 6895Addition to Income59Section 143(3)46Penny Stock39Section 25038Capital Gains38Section 14837Section 14735Long Term Capital Gains

NAVEEN KISHOR MOHNOT,MUMBAI vs. ITO-25(3)(5), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 325/MUM/2023[2011-2012]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2023AY 2011-2012

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blenaveen Kishor Mohnot V. Income Tax Officer –25(3)(5) 3Rd Floor, Monami Apartments C-10, Room No. 609, 6Th Floor Behind Chandan Cinema, Juhu Pratyakshkar Bhavan Mumbai - 400049 Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra (E), Mumbai – 400051 Pan: Abgpj1360D (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Jayant Bhatt Department Represented By : Shri S.N. Kabra

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 6. On merits, we observe that assessee has filed its return of income on 29.07.2011 declaring total income of ₹.6, 67,900/-. Based on the information received from the Investigation Wing that the assessee has dealt in sale and purchase of shares of M/s. VAS INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED, which is a penny

SMT RUPA HIMANSHU SHRIMANKAR ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT-24(3) , MUMBAI

Showing 1–20 of 83 · Page 1 of 5

34
Section 153A33
Limitation/Time-bar33
Section 13226

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 3144/MUM/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Blesmt Rupa Himanshu Shrimankar V. Acit – 24(3) 107, Sagar Avenue, S.V. Road Aayakar Bhavan Andheri (W), Mumbai - 400056 Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Avups8496B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Kiran Mehta Department Represented By : Shri S.N. Kabra

Section 68Section 69C

condonation of delay. In the affidavit assessee has submitted as under: - “1. I am assessed to income-tax under PAN: AVUPS8496B. 2. For Assessment Year: 2014-15 I had filed my Return of income on 25/11/2014 declaring NIL income. 3. For the year in reference, my case was selected for scrutiny assessment and in the scrutiny assessment I was assessed

SUNNY VIJAY LAKHANI ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 28(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6947/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (SR DR)For Respondent: Ms. Ritika Aggarwal
Section 68

delay of 392 days in filing the appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on , and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on , and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 6. Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged

SUNNY VIJAY LAKHANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, 28(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6948/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (SR DR)For Respondent: Ms. Ritika Aggarwal
Section 68

delay of 392 days in filing the appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on , and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on , and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 6. Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged

SUNNY VIJAY LAKHANI ,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, 28(3), MUMBAI

In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are In the result all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6950/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan ()

For Appellant: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (SR DR)For Respondent: Ms. Ritika Aggarwal
Section 68

delay of 392 days in filing the appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on , and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on , and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 6. Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged Briefly stated, the assessee is an individual engaged

KETAN V. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2496/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

DCIT CC 11, MUMBAI vs. KETAN V. SHAH, JALNA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2120/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

DCIT CC 11, MUMBAI vs. KETAN V. SHAH (HUF), JALNA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2123/MUM/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

DCIT CC 11, MUMBAI vs. KETAN V. SHAH, JALNA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2121/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

DCIT CC 11, MUMBAI vs. KETAN V. SHAH (HUF), JALNA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2122/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

KETAN V. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2497/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

KETAN V. SHAH HUF,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2498/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

KETAN V. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2494/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

DCIT CC 11, MUMBAI vs. KETAN V. SHAH, JALNA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2118/MUM/2013[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

DCIT CC 11, MUMBAI vs. KETAN V. SHAH, JALNA

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2119/MUM/2013[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

KETAN V. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT CEN CIR 11, MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 2495/MUM/2013[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2017AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri D.T.Garasia & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 2118-2121/Mum/2013, (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2002-03 To 2004-05 & 2006-07)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri. Samuel Darse, CIT DR
Section 132Section 153ASection 153B(1)(b)Section 249(2)

condone the delay of 92 days in filing appeal late by the asessee before learned CIT(A) and the matter was remitted back to learned CIT(A) to be decided on merits, vide common orders dated 15-09-2010 in ITA No. 6089-6094/Mum/2009 for AY 2002-03 to 2007-08 passed by the tribunal. The learned

RADHIKA ANANT DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIRAMAL CHEMBER, MUMBAI

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4514/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

delay in filing present appeals filed by the assessees before for A.Y. 2012-13 before this Tribunal’s stand condoned. 5 ITA Nos. 4513, 4514, 4515, 4516/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2012-13 Brief Facts of the case are as under: 5. The assessee’s submitted that they derived income under the head income from business, income from long-term capital gains

GIRIRAJ DAULAL DAMANI HUF,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIRAMAL CHEMBERS

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4516/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

delay in filing present appeals filed by the assessees before for A.Y. 2012-13 before this Tribunal’s stand condoned. 5 ITA Nos. 4513, 4514, 4515, 4516/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2012-13 Brief Facts of the case are as under: 5. The assessee’s submitted that they derived income under the head income from business, income from long-term capital gains

ANANT VIJAY DAMANI,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIRAMAL CHAMBER,MUMBAI

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4513/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

delay in filing present appeals filed by the assessees before for A.Y. 2012-13 before this Tribunal’s stand condoned. 5 ITA Nos. 4513, 4514, 4515, 4516/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2012-13 Brief Facts of the case are as under: 5. The assessee’s submitted that they derived income under the head income from business, income from long-term capital gains

NAROTTAM DAULAL DAMANI HUF,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PIRAMAL CHEMBER

In the result all appeals filed by the assessees for all assessment years stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4515/MUM/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Aug 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () I.T.A. No. 4513/Mum/2025 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Anant Vijay Damani Vs. Income Tax Officer 1304/1305, F Wing Ashok Piramal Chember, Gardens, Tokersi, Jivraj Lalbaug, Parel Road Sewree, Mumbai-400013 Mumbai- 400015 Pan:Aeepd7764E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 51

delay in filing present appeals filed by the assessees before for A.Y. 2012-13 before this Tribunal’s stand condoned. 5 ITA Nos. 4513, 4514, 4515, 4516/Mum/2025; A.Y. 2012-13 Brief Facts of the case are as under: 5. The assessee’s submitted that they derived income under the head income from business, income from long-term capital gains