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.

34 results for “condonation of delay”+ Carry Forward of Lossesclear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai534Kolkata425Chennai241Delhi167Ahmedabad161Pune152Hyderabad128Chandigarh99Bangalore90Jaipur89Raipur73Surat66Amritsar48Rajkot47Cuttack45Visakhapatnam40Calcutta39Nagpur34Lucknow26Indore25Guwahati17Patna16SC14Cochin11Varanasi10Allahabad8Karnataka7Jodhpur6Dehradun5Telangana4Panaji3Agra2Jabalpur1Andhra Pradesh1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN1Rajasthan1

Key Topics

Section 153C85Section 26341Section 143(3)40Section 153A37Section 6831Addition to Income22Section 25019Condonation of Delay13Section 143(2)

JAISINGH KRUSHNARAO CHAVHAN,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4, AAYKAR BHAVAN NAGPUR

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 562/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalejaishingh Krushnarao Chavhan, 95, Butibori Industrial Area,Tiwari, Nagpur 440 002, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan -Adopc8820B V/S Income Tax Officer Ward–4, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur-440001, Maharashtra. Assessee By:Shri.Vivek K. Jani. A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Vivek K. Jani. A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 44A

carried forward losses from AY 2011-12 had been accepted and allowed to be set-off in the intervening assessment years. Once such losses were accepted in earlier years, the same could not be denied in AY 2017-18 without any change in facts or law, 6. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, amend or delete

Showing 1–20 of 34 · Page 1 of 2

12
Section 115B10
Natural Justice10
Limitation/Time-bar9

SANJAY SHANKARRAO JADHAO,AMRAVATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 250

condone the delay in filing the present appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. However, a cost of ` 5,000, is levied upon the assessee for the delay in filing the petition, which should be paid to the account of The Nagpur High Court Legal Service Committee. In all fairness, the learned Counsel for the assessee agreed

MOONLIGHT STUDIO,NAGPUR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal is DISMISSED

ITA 287/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)Section 154

loss of Rs.13,69,203/- to be carried forward to subsequent year Therefore it is hereby held that there is no merit in the appeal filed by the Appellant and the same is hereby dismissed. 5.4.1. Goes without saying, if the delay in filing the return is condoned

GURPALSINGH CHANANSINGH NAGRA,AKOLA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 206/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)

carry on transportation of petroleum products. The transportation receipts were accounted in the books of firm ESKA as per system of accounting consistently followed. However CPC while processing the return of assessee Gurpalsingh C. Nagra considered these receipts in the hands of assessee on the basis of Form No.26AS as the TDS was reflected in the name of Gurpalsingh

NAGESHWARA CHARITABLE TRUST,NAGPUR vs. ITO WD 3, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 128/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 271(1)(c)

carried the matter before the first appellate authority. 5. The learned CIT(A), on a perusal of Form no.35, observed that there is a delay of 405 days in filing the appeal before him. The assessee, while 4 Nageshwara Charitable Trust requesting for condonation of delay in filing its appeal before the learned CIT(A), the reason submitted

NAGESHWARA CHARITABLE TRUST,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, EXEMPTION, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 129/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 271(1)(c)

carried the matter before the first appellate authority. 5. The learned CIT(A), on a perusal of Form no.35, observed that there is a delay of 405 days in filing the appeal before him. The assessee, while 4 Nageshwara Charitable Trust requesting for condonation of delay in filing its appeal before the learned CIT(A), the reason submitted

VINAY RAMSHARANDAS AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay and admit the same for adjudication on merits. 6. Insofar as the merits of the case are concerned, the facts are, the assessee is an Individual. For the year under consideration, on 31/01/2018, the assessee filed his return of income electronically, disclosing total income of ` 12,96,33,940. During the course of regular assessment framed under

VIDHI MINERALS AND ALLOYS PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 219/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250(6)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 43B

loss account, details of major expenses, balance confirmation of sundry creditors and unsecured loan party, copy of service tax and TDS return working, details of payment made u/sec.43B and such other details during the course of assessment proceedings, which are placed on record. The Assessing Officer while completing the assessment noted that assessee company had incurred interest expenses of Rs.8

SHUBHLAXMI LAND DEVELOPERS,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(5), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 362/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Nilesh Shriram ToshniwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 250Section 43C

condone the delay of 52 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 5. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1 On the basis of section 43CA of the Income Tax Act 1961 and the facts of the case, the Honourable Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has passed the order

GAJANAND FINANCIAL CONSULTANCY PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL) NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 126/NAG/2025[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Sept 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Manoj G. MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Pankaj Kumar
Section 143(3)Section 263Section 68

condone the delay of 267 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit, as no mala fide intention can be ascribed to the assessee. 5. Facts in Brief:– The assessee is a Company engaged in financial activities. The assessee, on 30/09/2013, filed its return of income for the year under consideration declaring total loss

SHRI SUBHASHCHAND CHANDAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 26/NAG/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.M. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 147Section 250Section 68

carried irreparable loss. Hence this Affidavit. Nagpur – 22/4/2021 Deponent” Shri Subhashchand Chandak (HUF) ITA no.26/Nag./2021 4. No reasonable or sufficient cause has been placed on record in support of the delay in filing the present appeal. The Affidavit is nebulous and cryptic and do not address the issue of delay in precise terms. When this fact was pointed

SUBHASHCHAND SUNDERLAL CHANKAK,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed in limine

ITA 33/NAG/2021[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri K.M. GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 147Section 250Section 68

carried irreparable loss. Hence this Affidavit. Nagpur – 22/4/2021 Deponent” Shri Subhashchand Chandak (HUF) ITA no.26/Nag./2021 4. No reasonable or sufficient cause has been placed on record in support of the delay in filing the present appeal. The Affidavit is nebulous and cryptic and do not address the issue of delay in precise terms. When this fact was pointed

DEENDAYAL SEVA PRATISHTHAN,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD-4, EXEMPTION, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 547/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 139(4)

Loss Account. During the relevant year, the assessee also incurred capital expenditure of ` 92,69,109. Both these expenses have been claimed as deduction in its computation of income. While computing taxable income, the said depreciation has remained to be added back, and as such, this leads to double deduction. On 25/11/2020, the assessee filed Form no.9A, intimating carry forward

MAYUR KHARA,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

In the result, Both the appeals of above mentioned assessee’s are allowed

ITA 64/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Mayur Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8869 N Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shri Amit Khara Vs. The Pcit Datta Chowk Nagpur-2 Yavatmalm 445 001 (Maharastra) Pan No.:Abwpk 8868 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal, Ca Revenue By :Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 28/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28 /06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. Both These Appeals Have Been Filed By The Above Mentioned Assessees Against Two Different Orders Passed U/S 263 Of The Act By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Nagpur- 2 Dated 17-02-2017 & 16-02-20217 For The Assessment Year 2016-17 Respectively. The Grounds Of Raised By The Above Mentioned Assessees Are As Under:-

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 143(3)Section 263

loss of revenue or prejudicial to the interests of the revenue. Unless both these factors co-exist or exist simultaneously, the Commissioner cannot invoke or resort to section 263. It cannot be exercised to correct every conceivable error committed by an ITO. Before the suomoto power of revision can be exercised, the Commissioner must at least prima facie find both

FATTESING PUNAJI DHABRE,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOME TAX – 2, NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of assessee is allowed

ITA 368/NAG/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Feb 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy(Physical Hearing) Fattesing Punaji Dhabre Pcit – 2, Nagpur Plot No. 132, Chandan Nagar, Post Vs Aayakar Bhawan, Civil Lines, Hanuman Nagar, Nagpur, Maharashtra – 440001. Maharashtra – 440009. [Pan: Bacpd6505Q] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Madhav Vichare, Ca Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit–Dr Date Of Hearing 17.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 24.02.2026 Order Under Section 254(1) Of Income Tax Act

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 254(1)Section 263Section 54B

delay in filing appeal is condoned. Now, adverting to merits of the case. 9. We find that assessment under section 147 read with section 143(3) was completed on 21.12.2018. in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer (AO) recorded that notices under section 142(1) was issued to the assessee and that such notices were replied by assessee with details

M/S AHUJA BULKS MOVERS PVT. LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CIRCAL-1, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 180/NAG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 180/Nag/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Ahuja Bulk Movers Pvt. Ltd. B-307, Lokmat Building, Wardha Road, Nagpur-440 012 Pan : Aabca5014E .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri R.K Ganeriwal, Ar Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale, Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 18.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 05.04.2022

For Appellant: Shri R.K Ganeriwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale, DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 201Section 201(1)Section 40

carried forwarded losses to NIL. 4. Appellant craves a right to add, modify, alter or withdraw and of the ground/s of appeal during the course of hearing.” 2. At the very outset of the hearing of the appeal, it was submitted by the Ld. Authorized Representative (for short ‘AR’) for the assessee that the appeal involves a delay

PRAMOD AGRAWAL ,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

Accordingly, the grounds of appeal 2 & 3 are dismissed

ITA 43/NAG/2021[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Jul 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Vikram Singh Yadav & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.Sh. Pramod Agrawal (Huf) Pr. Cit-2, 301, Sai Ankur Apartments Nagpur-440 001 Ramdaspeth Vs. Nagpur-440 010 Pan:Aaihp 2699N (Respondent) (Appellant)

Section 10Section 143(2)Section 147Section 148Section 263

condoned. 3. The brief facts of the case are that, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and reopened u/s 147 of Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’ for short) on the reason that, the assessee has claimed LTCG exemption under section 10 in ITR in respect of Capital Gain trading in a Penny Stock Company. Accordingly, a notice

INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 4/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

condone the delay of 218 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit since there is no mala fide intention on the part of the assessee. 5. Before us, the learned A.R. succinctly brought out the ground of dispute before us. He submitted that the assessee is a Private Limited Company and is engaged

M/S INDOWORTH INDIA LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT(TDS), CIRCLE 51(1) , NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for A

ITA 3/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur23 Sept 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri R.K. GaneriwalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 201Section 201(1)Section 201(3)

condone the delay of 218 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit since there is no mala fide intention on the part of the assessee. 5. Before us, the learned A.R. succinctly brought out the ground of dispute before us. He submitted that the assessee is a Private Limited Company and is engaged

NIMSHASKIYA MADHYANIK SHALEY KARAMCHARI SAHAKARI SANSTHA LTD.,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2, WARDHA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 156/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek KumarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(2)Section 56(2)(d)

condone the delay of 22 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 4. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. Whether the Ld. AO and CIT(A) is correct in disallowing a sum of Rs. 3,27,687/- from deduction claimed under Sec 80P as interest income on deposit nationalized