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.

72 results for “condonation of delay”+ Cash Depositclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai987Mumbai613Delhi525Ahmedabad430Kolkata407Hyderabad390Pune375Bangalore347Jaipur235Chandigarh216Amritsar179Surat168Indore149Visakhapatnam148Cochin144Patna131Lucknow129Rajkot121Raipur111Agra86Cuttack72Nagpur72Panaji62Calcutta37Allahabad31Jabalpur31Guwahati25Karnataka23Jodhpur23Varanasi20Dehradun10Ranchi6SC5Telangana3

Key Topics

Section 153C97Section 143(3)61Addition to Income56Section 26345Section 153A44Section 6840Section 25034Condonation of Delay32Cash Deposit30

ABID MUSTAFA KHAN,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-2(3), NAGPUR

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

ITA 502/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleabid Mustafa Khan, 301, Mayfair Residency, Raj Nagar Opp. Green Park, Nagpur 440 013, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Aqipk9595G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(2), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69A

deposits in the bank account and was treated as unexplained cash credit u/sec 69A of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.46,95,000/–, and passed order u/sec 147 r.w.s. 144 of the Act dated 23/03/2023. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed appeal before the CIT(A). 3. In the appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) found

Showing 1–20 of 72 · Page 1 of 4

Section 14826
Section 14423
Limitation/Time-bar17

GIRDHARILAL MOTILAL AGRAWAL,BULDANA vs. ITO WARD-1, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 332/NAG/2024[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 274

condone the delay. Now we proceed to decide the appeal on merit. 5. Facts in Brief:– The assessee was engaged in the activity as a contractor. Initially, for the year under consideration, the assessee did not file his return of income. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found that the assessee had deposited cash

SHAIKH MAHMOOD SHAIKH CHANDA,ACHALPUR vs. ITO WARD-4, AMRAVATI

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

ITA 541/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Oct 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleshaikh Mahmood Shaikh Chanda, 4, Ward No.4, Achalpur, Pathrot -444808, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Alipc0613Q V/S Income Tax Officer, Ward–4, ……………. Respondent Aayakar Bhavan, Amravati-444601, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.D.P. Lohiya.A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 253Section 271ASection 69

cash deposits aggregating to Rs.27,25,000/- u/sec69 of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.28,45,500/– and passed the order u/sec143(3) of the Act dated 27/12/2019. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed the appeal before the CIT(A). 3. In the appellate proceedings, the CIT(A) found that there is a delay

AMOL BABANRAV KOLAKAR,MANGRULPIR vs. ITO WARD-2, AKOLA

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

ITA 294/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Rachit ThakkarFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 68

delay which is supported by Affidavit duly sworn. The contents of the application seeking condonation are as under:– “The above referred Appellant's order passed by the CIT(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi on 18.12.2023. The same Appeal is filed on or before 17.02.2024 but the same is filed today 13.05.2024. Hence, the Appeal is late

ASHISH HARISH PARSHIONIKAR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(5), NAGPUR

In the result, Assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 332/NAG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryashish Harish Parshionikar, Ito, Ward-4(5), Nagpur. 214, Suyog Nagar, Manewada Vs. Road, Ring Road, Nagpur. Pan: Arbpp 1844 R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Abhay Agrawal, Ld. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr.D.R
Section 144Section 250Section 253(3)Section 69A

cash deposits were from legitimate business receipts of my liquor and food retail business, duly supported by sale registers and bank statements. 6. Prejudice to the Appellant: If the delay is not condoned

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

SHREE SANT BHOJAJI MAHARAJ DEOSTHAN AJANSARA,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) -4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

ITA 211/NAG/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Apr 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 263

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted to be heard on ground of merits. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust, registered under Society Registration Act, 1860 in the office of Charity Commissioner, Wardha. The assessee filed return of income for the A.Y 2015-16 on 31.03.2017 declaring total income

SHREE SANT BHOJAJI MAHARAJ DEOSTHAN AJANSARA,WARDHA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) - 4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

ITA 212/NAG/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Apr 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 263

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted to be heard on ground of merits. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust, registered under Society Registration Act, 1860 in the office of Charity Commissioner, Wardha. The assessee filed return of income for the A.Y 2015-16 on 31.03.2017 declaring total income

SHREE SANT BHOJAJI MAHARAJ DEOSTHAN AJANSARA,WARDHA vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PUNE AT NGP, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is in ITA No

ITA 186/NAG/2025[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Apr 2026AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 250Section 263

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted to be heard on ground of merits. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a charitable trust, registered under Society Registration Act, 1860 in the office of Charity Commissioner, Wardha. The assessee filed return of income for the A.Y 2015-16 on 31.03.2017 declaring total income

SHRI AMIT ARVIND BANDE,GADCHIROLI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 CHANDRAPUR, CHANDRAPUR

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

ITA 221/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: MS Alfiya Rozie, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 142(1)Section 143Section 147Section 148Section 250(6)Section 69A

cash deposit in the Bank. It was the submission of the Learned Counsel for the Assessee that he has furnished copy of bank statement and Form 26AS. However, the Assessing Officer without considering the documents placed on record, made the impugned addition of Rs.17,94,160/- as unexplained money u/sec.69A of the Act. He submitted that when the appeal

OMPRAKASH SHANKARLAL SHARMA,DARYAPUR vs. D.C.I.T, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 156/NAG/2025[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 May 2025

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 69

delay is hereby condoned. 3. The assessee has raised following grounds:– 2 Shri Omprakash Shankarlal Sharma ITA no.156/Nag./2025 “1. THAT considering the fact of the case, the lower authorities erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 8,14,659/- presuming the deposited in bank is out of kerosene sale and recovery and treating the same as unexplained investments

ARPITA MATHEW ARUKAKKAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

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

ITA 501/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalearpita Mathew Arukakkal, Residency Road, Sadar Nagpur- 440001, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Arkpm3965D V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–5(3), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By:Shri.Sapan Usrethe.A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Sapan Usrethe.A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 148Section 151(1)

condonation of delay filed during the appellate proceedings. 2 Arpita Mathew Arukakkal 2. On the facts and circumstances of case the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre was not justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay without deciding the appeal on merit and without considering the circumstances occurred in filing the appeal in delay as no notice

SHRI VILASRAO DESHMUKH SHIKSHAN PRASARAK VA BAHUDESHIYA S BULDANA,BULDHANA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2(EXEMPTION), NAGPUR

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

ITA 333/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 10Section 11Section 12ASection 143(2)Section 144Section 148Section 234ASection 249(4)Section 250

cash deposited in bank account remained unexplained and thus addition made by A.O. is unjustified, unwarranted and unsustainable. 12. The learned A.O. ought to have held that assessee is registered u/s 12AA of I.T. Act 1961 and is eligible for exemption u/s 11 of I.T. Act 1961. 13. The learned A.O. ought to have accepted the income of assessee

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

SARVODAYA NAGRI CO OP PAT SOC LTD,SHEGAON vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER,WARD-2, KHAMGAON

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

ITA 330/NAG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jan 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 144Section 234ASection 69ASection 80P

delay is hereby condoned in view of the sworn Affidavit furnished by the employee of the assessee. 4. The only issue raised by the assessee relates to the addition of ` 6,70,500, under section 69A of the Act in respect of cash deposited

REACKON CONCRETES PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. DCIT OR ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

ITA 42/NAG/2024[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur03 Feb 2025AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mahadev Vichare, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 68

condone the delay of 254 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the appeal on merits. 3. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the assessee is a company and has filed it’s return of income on 15.09.2017 declaring income at Rs.21,40,590/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny

YUVRADHANI AGRO & DEVELOPERS PVT LTD,YAVATMAL vs. ITO WARD-1, YAVATMAL , YAVATMAL

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 47/NAG/2026[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Mar 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.47/Nag/2026 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Yuvradhani Agro & Developers Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pvt Ltd. Ward-1, Yavatmal G.No 68 Ralegaon, Yavatmal 445402, Maharashtra Pan: Aaacy5622R Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Ms.Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 144Section 148Section 69A

condone the delay before ld.CIT(A). 3. So far as merits of the case are concerned, assessee has contended that books of account are audited and source of alleged cash deposits

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 501/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Nitin Gulati a/w Pankaj KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCIT ACIT CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 500/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Nitin Gulati a/w Pankaj KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash

ADITI EXPRESS CARGO INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED THROUGH ITS ERSTWHILE DIRECTOR PRASHANT NATWARLAL LAKHANI,NAGPUR vs. DCITACIT CIRCLE-3 , NAGPUR

In the result, all the captioned seven appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 498/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Nitin Gulati a/w Pankaj KapoorFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 250

condonation of delay and the reasons for the late filing of the appeal. No opportunity was provided to explain the delay adequately. The appellant reserves the right to add, delete, or modify any grounds during the course of the appeal.” 2. The factual matrix of the case are that, the assessee has deposited cash