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.

237 results for “condonation of delay”+ Search & Seizureclear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi434Chennai363Hyderabad258Mumbai237Kolkata181Jaipur112Karnataka109Ahmedabad89Bangalore85Visakhapatnam69Pune69Surat69Chandigarh52Amritsar48Indore28Nagpur28Patna27Cochin25Rajkot21Guwahati19Cuttack18Lucknow15Dehradun13Raipur13Jodhpur10Telangana7SC6Calcutta6Panaji4Ranchi4Kerala4Orissa3Agra2Jabalpur2Rajasthan1Punjab & Haryana1Gauhati1Allahabad1

Key Topics

Section 153C93Section 153A73Section 13263Section 143(3)62Addition to Income62Search & Seizure47Limitation/Time-bar34Section 25031Section 68

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

Showing 1–20 of 237 · Page 1 of 12

...
29
Section 14A25
Section 14724
Condonation of Delay24

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

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)

seizure of incriminating documents during the search operations conducted by Revenue u/s 132 on 21-02-2007. The assessee did not file return of income in pursuance to notice u/s 153A issued by the AO. The assessee did not participated in the proceedings for assessment u/s 153A of the Act despite several notices and opportunity granted by the AO which

DUSHYANT M KHONA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee’s for Asst

ITA 6390/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6390/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Mr. Dushyant M. Khona. Vs. The Ito, 20(2)(1), M/S. Vss & Associates, Mumbai. Chartered Accountants, 306, Dalamal Chambers, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacpk4146M .. (""यथ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6391/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Mrs. Pushpa M. Khona. Vs. The Ito, 20(2)(3), M/S. Vss & Associates, Mumbai. Chartered Accountants, 306, Dalamal Chambers, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aarpk6482H .. (""यथ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri. Prakash Jhunjhunwala & Sanjay JainFor Respondent: Shri. M.C. Omi Ningshen
Section 143(3)

condonation of delay in filing the sais appeals. Since the issues involved in both the appeals are common, both the appeals were clubbed, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 6390/Mum/2016 Asst. year 2009-10 Brief facts of this case are that the assessee filed his return of income

PUSHPA M KHONA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 20(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee’s for Asst

ITA 6391/MUM/2016[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Feb 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Rajendra, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6390/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Mr. Dushyant M. Khona. Vs. The Ito, 20(2)(1), M/S. Vss & Associates, Mumbai. Chartered Accountants, 306, Dalamal Chambers, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aacpk4146M .. (""यथ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6391/Mum/2016 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07) Mrs. Pushpa M. Khona. Vs. The Ito, 20(2)(3), M/S. Vss & Associates, Mumbai. Chartered Accountants, 306, Dalamal Chambers, New Marine Lines, Mumbai- 400 020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aarpk6482H .. (""यथ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Shri. Prakash Jhunjhunwala & Sanjay JainFor Respondent: Shri. M.C. Omi Ningshen
Section 143(3)

condonation of delay in filing the sais appeals. Since the issues involved in both the appeals are common, both the appeals were clubbed, heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. ITA No. 6390/Mum/2016 Asst. year 2009-10 Brief facts of this case are that the assessee filed his return of income

DCIT CEN CIR 10, MUMBAI vs. KEYSTONE REALTORS P.LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed and cross objections filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5629/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Amarjit Singhita Nos. 5629 & 5630/Mum/2014 (A.Y: 2008-09 & 2009-10) Dcit, Central Circle-10 Vs. M/S. Keystone Realtors Room No. 802, 8Th Pvt Ltd., Floor, Old Cgo Annexe Natraj, Mv Road, Bldg, Mk Road, Junction, We Highway, Mumbai-400020. Andheri (E), Mumbai-400069. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaack2499Q Appellant .. Respondent

Section 115JSection 132(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 153A

seizure operation u/s 132(1) of the Act conducted in the course of Rustomjee Evershine Group on 21.10.2010 and the assessee also was covered under search action, therefore notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued. In compliance to the notice, the assessee has filed the return of income for the A.Y 2008-09 on 29.10.2011 disclosing a total income

DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5375/MUM/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

delay of 763 days 763 days is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits admitted for adjudication on merits. admitted for adjudication on merits 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is Briefly stated, the facts of the case

DONA BUILDERS PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 1(3)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 5371/MUM/2025[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2026AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan() Assessment Year: 2009-10 & Assessment Year: 2010-11 & Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 & Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dona Builders Pvt Ltd Dcit, Circle 1(3)(1), Mumbai 108, Shiv Aashish S.V. Road, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Vs. Andheri West, Mumbai- 400058 400020 Pan No. Aaacd 3116 F Appellant Respondent : Mr. Rajesh Shah Assessee By : Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, Sr-Dr A/W Revenue By Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad, Cit Dr : 06/11/2025 Date Of Hearing Date Of Pronouncement : 21/01/2026 Order Per Bench These Five Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax

For Appellant: Mr. Annavaram Kosuri, SR-DR a/wFor Respondent: Mr. Rajesh Shah
Section 147Section 68

delay of 763 days 763 days is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits admitted for adjudication on merits. admitted for adjudication on merits 4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is Briefly stated, the facts of the case

SRIRAM MAINTENANCE SERVICES( SINCE DISSOLVED) THROUGH ITS EX-PARTNER MR. HEMENDRA R. MERCHANT,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 35, MUMBAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 5658/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman

condone the delay of 34 days and take the appeal to be decided on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard clubbed together and are being disposed off by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience & brevity

DCIT CC-35, MUMBAI vs. SRIKRISHNA SECURITY SERVICES, MUMBAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 4920/MUM/2010[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman

condone the delay of 34 days and take the appeal to be decided on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard clubbed together and are being disposed off by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience & brevity

SRIRAM SECURITY AGENCY ( SINCE DISSOLVED) THROUGH ITS EX-PARTNER MR. HEMENDRA R. MERCHANT,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 35, MUMBAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 5666/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman

condone the delay of 34 days and take the appeal to be decided on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard clubbed together and are being disposed off by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience & brevity

SRIKIRSHNA SECURITY SERVICES ( SINCE DISSOLVED) THROUGH ITS EX-PARTNER MR. HEMENDRA R. MERCHANT,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CEN CIR 35, MUMBAI

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 5674/MUM/2010[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Dec 2015AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri Jason P Boaz & Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman

condone the delay of 34 days and take the appeal to be decided on merits. 3. Since the issues involved in all the appeals are common arising out of identical set of facts, therefore, same were heard clubbed together and are being disposed off by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience & brevity