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.

174 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 12A(1)(b)clear

Sorted by relevance

Pune249Mumbai174Delhi146Ahmedabad112Jaipur109Hyderabad79Chennai75Bangalore74Kolkata72Indore36Surat32Lucknow30Chandigarh27Nagpur24Cuttack20Rajkot18Amritsar12Jodhpur12Raipur11Panaji10Visakhapatnam9Patna9Cochin7Agra6Allahabad5Guwahati3Jabalpur2Ranchi2SC1Dehradun1Varanasi1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1

Key Topics

Section 12A216Exemption85Section 1184Section 80G68Section 12A(1)(ac)52Section 143(1)41Condonation of Delay38Charitable Trust35Section 250

JAN SEVA MANDAL ,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD -1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statisti...

ITA 3445/MUM/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jul 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Jan Seva Mandal, Central Processing Centre Income Vinayalaya, Mahakali Caves Tax Deparment, Bengaluru, Vs. Road, Andheri (East), Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400093. Ward 1(4), Mumbai. 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building, Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaatj 4868 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan PatelFor Respondent: Mr. Vivek Perampurna, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)

condonation of delay under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. under Section 119(2)(b) of the Act. The relevant finding of the Ld. nt finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: CIT(A) is reproduced as under: “Decision: 6.1 The statement of facts, grounds of appeal, and the order The statement of facts, grounds

Showing 1–20 of 174 · Page 1 of 9

...
32
Section 11(2)29
Section 80G(5)29
Addition to Income29

RAAHAT HUMANITARIAN FOUDATION ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4775/MUM/2024[2024-25]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Dec 2024AY 2024-25

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh () Assessment Year: 2024-25 Raahat Humanitarian Foundation, Cit (Exemptions), A 204, Zubaida Park, Behind Simla Room No. 601, 6Th Floor, Cumballa Hill Vs. Park, Old Mumbai Pune Road, Mtnl Te Building Pedder Road, Dr Kausa Mumbra, Gopalrao Deshmukh Marg, Thane-400612. Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaetr 9830 K Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Tanzil PadvekarFor Respondent: 17/12/2024
Section 11Section 12A

condone such delay and such application shall be deemed to ation shall be deemed to have been filed within time;] have been filed within time;]” 6.2 The process of granting registration process of granting registration for application of the for application of the category under section 12A(1)(ac)(viB) has category under section 12A(1)(ac)(viB) has been

SHREE PUSHKAR FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION)-WARD 2(30, MUMBAI

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

ITA 2714/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shree Pushkar Foundation, Ito (Exemption) – Ward 2(3), 301/302, 3Rd Floor, Cumbala Hill Tele Exchange Atlanta Centre, Vs. (Mtnl), Peddar Rd, Tardeo, Near Udyog Bhavan, Mumbai-400026. Sonawala Road, Goregaon East, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aawts 2303 N Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Sandip S. Nagar, &For Respondent: 24/07/2024
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

12A of the Shree Pushkar Foundation Shree Pu 3 Act and prescribed Form No. 10B on 15.02.2022 (on the due date). Act and prescribed Form No. 10B on 15.02.2022 (on the du Act and prescribed Form No. 10B on 15.02.2022 (on the du Further, the assessee was required to file Form No. 10, which is a Further, the assessee

UMMEED FOUNDATION,AL SHAKREEN APT vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE, PMT BUILDING COMMERCIAL COMPLEX

In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for In the result, the grounds of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1876/MUM/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2023-24 Ummeed Foundation, Cit(E), Pune, Room No. 204, A1 Shakreen Apt, 322, 3Rd Floor, Income Tax Vs. Waf Acomplex Chs, H-104, Office, Pmt Building Sharifa Road, Amrut Nagar, City Commercial Complex, Shankar Convent High School, Thane, Sheth Road, Swargate, Kausa B.O., Maharashtra-400612. Pune-411037. Pan No. Aaatu 4914 H Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Ankush Kapoor, CIT-DRFor Respondent: Mr. Rohan Dedhia
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iv)

12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act was also rejected vide order dated 11.03.2024. order dated 11.03.2024. 3. We have heard rival submissions of the parties and perused heard rival submissions of the parties and perused heard rival submissions of the parties and perused the relevant material on record. As far as non the relevant material on record

SHA HURGOWAN ANANDJI DESAI CHARITIES ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC , BENGULURU

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ITA 2807/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Aug 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Sha Hurgowan Anandji Desai Dy. Director Of Income-Tax, Cpc Charities, Bengaluru, 18, Bhaskar Lane, Bhuleshwar, Vs. Income Tax Officer Exemption Mumbai-400002. Ward 2(3), 6Th Floor, Mtnl Te Building Pedder Road, Mumbai-400026. Pan No. Aaats 0405 R Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Ms. Vasanti Patel, &
Section 11

delay may kindly be condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the condoned and the benefits of Section 11 be granted to the Appellant. Appellant. 4. 4. Without prejudice to the above, 4. Without prejudice to the above, it is submitted that on the facts

AADIVASI WELFARE FOUNDATION,JHARKHAND vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, EXEMPTION WARD 1(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2870/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhary & Shri Gagan Goyalaadivasi Welfare Foundation, Plot No. 8185, Sri Krishna Road, Near Srinath University, Dindli Basti, Majhitola, Adityapur, Pan No. Aarca5995N ...... Appellant Vs. Ao (Exem.) Ward-1(1), Pratistha Bhavan, Church Gate, M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 ..... Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Venkata Anil, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha, Ld. DR
Section 11Section 11(2)Section 12ASection 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 246Section 250

12A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) filed its return of income on for the Assessment Year 2022-2023 on 21.10.2022 declaring total income at Rs. NIL. The return of the Assessee processed under section 143(1) of the Act on 08.03.2023, wherein a sum of Rs. 3, 02, 91,619/- was determined

CAREGIVER SAATHI FOUNDATION,GOREGAON MUMBAI vs. DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BENGLURU, DY.DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC BENGLURU

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

ITA 4002/MUM/2024[2022-2023]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jan 2025AY 2022-2023

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2022-23 Caregiver Saathi Foundation, Dy. Cit, Cpc 1703, Sienna Tower Wing-B, Lodha Bengluru-560100. Vs. Florenza, Western Express Highway N Ext, To Hub Mall, Goregaon, Mumbai-400063. Pan No. Aaicc 5644 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 14/01/2025
Section 11Section 139Section 139(1)

12A(1)(b) of the I.T.Act which is the time limit as per sec 139(1).The appellant has failed the time limit as per sec 139(1).The appellant has failed the time limit as per sec 139(1).The appellant has failed to fulfill the conditions for allowing accumulation of to fulfill the conditions for allowing accumulation

NISHRIN BOOKWALA MEMORIAL CANCER AID TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee

ITA 7889/MUM/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. Amol Kirtane, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

b The material facts, briefly stated, are that the assessee filed an riefly stated, are that the assessee filed an application in prescribed Form No. 10AB on 29.03.2025. The ld application in prescribed Form No. 10AB on 29.03.2025. The application in prescribed Form No. 10AB on 29.03.2025. The Commissioner of Income Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) observed that

NISHRIN BOOKWALA MEMORIAL CANCER AID TRUST,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee

ITA 7890/MUM/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Feb 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Appellant: Mr. Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Mr. Amol Kirtane, CIT-DR
Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80G

b The material facts, briefly stated, are that the assessee filed an riefly stated, are that the assessee filed an application in prescribed Form No. 10AB on 29.03.2025. The ld application in prescribed Form No. 10AB on 29.03.2025. The application in prescribed Form No. 10AB on 29.03.2025. The Commissioner of Income Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions) observed that

LIKEMINDED EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) , MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

ITA 2647/MUM/2025[-]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

condone the delay.\n5.7\nIt is further stated that non-consideration of the explanations\nsubmitted by the appellant and issuing an adverse order without giving\nan opportunity of being heard is against the principle of Natural Justice\nand shall cause undue hardship to it. The delay in filing of application\nfor registration was on account of genuine medical reasons

M/S. LIKEMINDED EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY ,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, both appeals by the assessee are allowed\nfor statistical purposes

ITA 2648/MUM/2025[NA.]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jun 2025
For Respondent: \nvs
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 12A

condone the delay.\n5.7\nIt is further stated that non-consideration of the explanations\nsubmitted by the appellant and issuing an adverse order without giving\nan opportunity of being heard is against the principle of Natural Justice\nand shall cause undue hardship to it. The delay in filing of application\nfor registration was on account of genuine medical reasons

DR. PRABHA ATRE FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX EXEMPTION WARD 1(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 124/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 May 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Sandeep Singh Karhail & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Sanjiv Brahme and Shri Jayant Bhatt, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Kiran Unavekar, SR. DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 139Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)

B within the extended due date. According to him, since assessee had not obtained approval of 3 Dr. Prabha Atre Founda"on, Mumbai; AY 2020-21 appropriate authority for condoning the delay of filing of audit report in Form-10B, CPC disallowed the claim of expenditure incurred for the charitable purposes. Assessee has failed to follow the procedural guidelines

DEDHIA MUSIC FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

ITA 744/MUM/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Aditya AjgaonkarFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 8Section 80G

condone the delay in filing these appeals and admitted them for hearing. 3. The facts relating to the case are stated in brief. The assessee is a non-profit organization, incorporated u/s. 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 on 08-12-2023. The main objects of the assessee read as under: “Promote Indian heritage art such as Indian Classical music

DEDHIA MUSIC FOUNDATION ,MUMBAI vs. CIT (EXMPTION), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed

ITA 743/MUM/2025[NA]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2025

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Aditya AjgaonkarFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT-DR
Section 11Section 12ASection 8Section 80G

condone the delay in filing these appeals and admitted them for hearing. 3. The facts relating to the case are stated in brief. The assessee is a non-profit organization, incorporated u/s. 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 on 08-12-2023. The main objects of the assessee read as under: “Promote Indian heritage art such as Indian Classical music

MS. ANAGHA AMAR AINAPURE,MUMBAI vs. CIT(A), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 2664/Mum/2024 is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2614/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya - CAFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule - CITDR)
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

delay of 17 months i.e. 500 days were condoned. 4. We heard the rival submission, considered the documents available in the record. The assessee is a trust and working in Dharavi, Mumbai in Slum area for education of the children. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted a paper book which is kept in the record. The assessee is already registered

SHALEM ASSEMBLIES OF GOD MISSION,MUMBAI vs. CIT(EXEMPTIONS), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA 2664/Mum/2024 is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2664/MUM/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Aug 2024AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Br Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Vimal Punmiya - CAFor Respondent: Shri Dr. Kishor Dhule - CITDR)
Section 11Section 12Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)Section 80GSection 80G(5)

delay of 17 months i.e. 500 days were condoned. 4. We heard the rival submission, considered the documents available in the record. The assessee is a trust and working in Dharavi, Mumbai in Slum area for education of the children. The Ld.AR for the assessee submitted a paper book which is kept in the record. The assessee is already registered

J V FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 182/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 44A

12A(1)(b), after providing due opportunity to the appellant as per the provisions of sec 143(1) of the Income Tax Act is found to be correct. 7.7 Further, as stated by appellant that the request for condonation of delay in filing form 10B for the concerned year was filed before the CIT, Exemption, Mumbai on 27/06/2024

JV FOUNDATION,MUMBAI vs. ITO EXEMPTION WARD 1(4), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed

ITA 181/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik, (Sr. DR)
Section 11Section 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)Section 44A

12A(1)(b), after providing due opportunity to the appellant as per the provisions of sec 143(1) of the Income Tax Act is found to be correct. 7.7 Further, as stated by appellant that the request for condonation of delay in filing form 10B for the concerned year was filed before the CIT, Exemption, Mumbai on 27/06/2024

SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI),MUMBAI vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3010/MUM/2022[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2015-2016
For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh – Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Dr Kishor Dhule (CIT-DR)
Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(2)Section 80G

12A and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. The assessee has also been approved in terms 2 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). of Section 10(23C)(v) of the Act by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai [in short ‘CCIT, Mumbai’]. 4. For the relevant

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION) 2(1), MUMBAI vs. SHREE SAI BABA SANSTHAN TRUST (SHIRDI), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed and appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3049/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2023AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh – Sr. CounselFor Respondent: Dr Kishor Dhule (CIT-DR)
Section 10Section 115BSection 12ASection 143(2)Section 80G

12A and 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short ‘the Act’]. The assessee has also been approved in terms 2 A.Ys. 2015-16, 2017-18, 2018-19 Shri Sai Baba Sansthan Trust (Shirdi). of Section 10(23C)(v) of the Act by the Ld. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai [in short ‘CCIT, Mumbai’]. 4. For the relevant