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.

39 results for “condonation of delay”+ Rectification u/s 154clear

Sorted by relevance

Patna467Delhi273Mumbai258Pune204Chennai160Bangalore158Kolkata104Ahmedabad68Hyderabad66Jaipur55Indore41Nagpur39Chandigarh38Lucknow32Cochin24Karnataka23Surat21Visakhapatnam19Raipur16Amritsar13Agra12Rajkot11Jodhpur10Jabalpur8Cuttack6Allahabad4Dehradun4Panaji3SC2Telangana2Varanasi2Guwahati2Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 200A95Section 234E79Section 15445Section 143(3)29Section 6829Rectification u/s 15424TDS22Section 200A(1)16Section 25015Section 153A

ARTHAKALASH MAGASVARGIYA KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PATH SWANSTHA LIMITED,DHAMANGAON vs. ITO WARD-1, AMRAVATI

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

ITA 756/NAG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur19 Feb 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri R. K. Pandaassessment Year : 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Himesh DembleFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234ASection 80PSection 80P(2)(a)

rectification application u/s 154 of the Act. However, no action or further communication was received from the authorities. The assessee, therefore, filed an appeal before the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A). However, the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A) dismissed the appeal on account of delay in filing of the same by observing as under: 3 3. Aggrieved with such order of the Ld. Addl/JCIT

Showing 1–20 of 39 · Page 1 of 2

12
Addition to Income11
Condonation of Delay8

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

INCOME TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION) - 4, NAGPUR vs. DEENDAYAL SEVA PRATISHTHAN, YAVATMAL

In the result, appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 572/NAG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore B. PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 11Section 12Section 138

rectification order under section 154 of the Act was passed by the CPC on 07/03/2023 rejecting the claim of the assessee and confirming the addition made in order u/s 143(1) dated 19/10/2022. 4. On appeal, the learned CIT(A) allowed the grounds raised by the assessee by observing as under:– “5.3.2 In the instant case, the reason for disallowance

SAINATH VIDYALAYA,MAKKEPALLI vs. ITO,TDS WARD-52(3), CHANDRAPUR

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are\nallowed

ITA 242/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Lakkadsha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

condone the delay of 117 days in filing\nthe appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the\nappeals on merits.\n2.\nBriefly stated facts of the case assessment order\nthat the assessee is running an educational institution viz.,\nSainath Vidyalaya Makkepalli entrusted by the Government.\nThe Assessing Officer-TDS-CPC [TRACES] levied late fee\nu/sec.234E for filing the return

SAINATH VIDYALAYA,MAKKEPALLI vs. ITO, TDS WARD-52(3), CHANDRAPUR

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

ITA 241/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Feb 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mohd. Lakkadsha, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

condone the delay of 117 days in filing the appeals before the Tribunal and proceed to decide the appeals on merits. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case assessment order that the assessee is running an educational institution viz., Sainath Vidyalaya Makkepalli entrusted by the Government. The Assessing Officer-TDS-CPC [TRACES] levied late fee u/sec.234E for filing the return

SHRI SANJAY VISHNUPRASAD AGRAWAL,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), NAGPUR

Appeal is dismissed as withdrawn in above terms

ITA 37/NAG/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S. S. Godaraआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.37/Nag/2022 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16 Shri Sanjay Vishnuprasad Vs. Ito, Ward-4(1), Nagpur. Agrawal, C/O. D. S. Jogani, Advocate, 640/A, Navnidhi, Tekdi Road, Sadar, Nagpur- 440001. Pan : Ablpa5720F Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri D. S. Jogani Revenue By : Shri G. J. Ninawe Date Of Hearing : 01.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.12.2022 आदेश / Order Per S. S. Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16 Arises Against The National Faceless Appeal Centre “Nfac”, Delhi’S Order Dated 21.12.2021 Passed In Case No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2021- 22/1037993785(1), Involving Proceedings U/S 154 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short “The Act”. Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. The Assessee Raises The Following Substantive Grounds In The Instant Appeal :- “1. That On Facts & Circumstances Of Case, As Well As Also In Law, The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Erred In Not Allowing The Set Off Of Loss

For Appellant: Shri D. S. JoganiFor Respondent: Shri G. J. Ninawe
Section 154Section 71(1)

u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 instead of directing to the Assessing Officer to allow the Loss assessed for the F & O Shares Transactions at Rs. 3,33,972/- to Set Off against all income under Other Heads of Income shown by assessee and assessed by the Assessing Officer.” 3. Learned counsel vehemently reiterated the assessee’s stand

M/S. RAI UDYOG LTD.,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), NAGPUR

In the result, these twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 311 & 312/Nag/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rai Udyog Limited 1, Rajat Sankul, Opp. Bus Stand, Ganesh Peth, Nagpur-440018 Pan: Aaccr6008G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer (Tds) Hq-1 / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds), Nagpur . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By These Twin Appeals The Assessee Challenged Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044245542(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1044244849(1) Both Dt. 28/07/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2014-15 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 154Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 24Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 271C

rectification u/s 154 of the Act was passed on 27/07/2018 and order levying penalty u/s 271C of the Act was passed on 11/05/2018, whereas the appeal thereagainst before the Ld. NFAC were filed on 04/03/2021 & 18/02/2021 respectively. Ostensibly there is unsubstantial delay in instituting these appeals and were admittedly filed without accompanying petition for condonation

RAI UDYOG LTD.,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), NAGPUR

In the result, these twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 312/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 311 & 312/Nag/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rai Udyog Limited 1, Rajat Sankul, Opp. Bus Stand, Ganesh Peth, Nagpur-440018 Pan: Aaccr6008G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer (Tds) Hq-1 / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds), Nagpur . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By These Twin Appeals The Assessee Challenged Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044245542(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1044244849(1) Both Dt. 28/07/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2014-15 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 154Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 24Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 271C

rectification u/s 154 of the Act was passed on 27/07/2018 and order levying penalty u/s 271C of the Act was passed on 11/05/2018, whereas the appeal thereagainst before the Ld. NFAC were filed on 04/03/2021 & 18/02/2021 respectively. Ostensibly there is unsubstantial delay in instituting these appeals and were admittedly filed without accompanying petition for condonation

HERD EDUCATIONAL & MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 4(3), NAGPUR

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

ITA 323/NAG/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur24 Sept 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryassessment Year: 2023-24

For Appellant: Shri Shikha Loya, Ld. Amicus CuriaeFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 11Section 11(1)(c)Section 119(2)(b)Section 12ASection 139(4)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

condone the same u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act and therefore the Assessee should have filed such petition before the appropriate authority and not before the Ld. Commissioner. The Ld. Commissioner consequently dismissed the appeal of the Assessee. 4. The Assessee has claimed that it had filed original return of income well before the due date

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

u/s 68 is against the facts of the case. 6. That, the order passed by the A.O. and upheld by the CIT (A) as regards to additions made on the grounds other than the primary ground on which case was reopened is against the facts of case and the law applicable thereto. 7. The A.O. has not followed guidelines prescribed

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

u/s 68 is against the facts of the case. 6. That, the order passed by the A.O. and upheld by the CIT (A) as regards to additions made on the grounds other than the primary ground on which case was reopened is against the facts of case and the law applicable thereto. 7. The A.O. has not followed guidelines prescribed

HARIOM BIOTECH AGRI FARMING,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CPC BENGALURU, CPC BENGALURU KARNATAKA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 300/NAG/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

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

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 154Section 154(1)(b)Section 2

u/s 154 of the I.T. Act. 4. The correct alternative for the appellant would have been to file a revised return within time available for it, or file such revised return after getting any delay condoned by the Administrative Commissioner.” Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 5. Before us, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that there

THE JAMSETJI NUSSERWANJI TATA PARSI HIGH SCHOOL TRUST,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX CPC, BENGALORE, BANGALORE

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

ITA 377/NAG/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 May 2024AY 2021-22

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

For Appellant: Shri Manoj MoryaniFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 11Section 143(1)(a)Section 154Section 234ASection 250

rectification order dated 07/03/2023, passed under section 154 of the Act. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, order passed Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal, National Faceless Appeal Centre U/s. 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is illegal, invalid and bad in law; The Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD 1(2), AKOLA , AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 404/NAG/2017[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

u/s 234E of the Act; involving varying sums, for delay in filing of TDS statement(s), there is hardly any dispute between the parties that this statutory provision itself carries prospective effect from 01.06.2015 whereas all these quarters / assessment years; as the case may be, in issue before us are well before the said date. That being the clinching fact

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD 1(2) , AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 406/NAG/2017[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

u/s 234E of the Act; involving varying sums, for delay in filing of TDS statement(s), there is hardly any dispute between the parties that this statutory provision itself carries prospective effect from 01.06.2015 whereas all these quarters / assessment years; as the case may be, in issue before us are well before the said date. That being the clinching fact

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PANCHAYAT SAMITI,MURTIZAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -1(2), AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 25/NAG/2018[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

u/s 234E of the Act; involving varying sums, for delay in filing of TDS statement(s), there is hardly any dispute between the parties that this statutory provision itself carries prospective effect from 01.06.2015 whereas all these quarters / assessment years; as the case may be, in issue before us are well before the said date. That being the clinching fact

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER PANCHAYAT SAMITI MURTIZAPUR ,MURTIZAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -1(2), AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 26/NAG/2018[2015-2016]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2015-2016

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

u/s 234E of the Act; involving varying sums, for delay in filing of TDS statement(s), there is hardly any dispute between the parties that this statutory provision itself carries prospective effect from 01.06.2015 whereas all these quarters / assessment years; as the case may be, in issue before us are well before the said date. That being the clinching fact

BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER , PANCHAYATI SAMITI , MURTIZAPUR ,MURTIZAPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD -1, AKOLA

Appeals are allowed

ITA 27/NAG/2018[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

u/s 234E of the Act; involving varying sums, for delay in filing of TDS statement(s), there is hardly any dispute between the parties that this statutory provision itself carries prospective effect from 01.06.2015 whereas all these quarters / assessment years; as the case may be, in issue before us are well before the said date. That being the clinching fact

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 237/NAG/2019[2013-14 Q-2]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

u/s 234E of the Act; involving varying sums, for delay in filing of TDS statement(s), there is hardly any dispute between the parties that this statutory provision itself carries prospective effect from 01.06.2015 whereas all these quarters / assessment years; as the case may be, in issue before us are well before the said date. That being the clinching fact

P.N.DEWALKAR CONSTRUCTION ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are allowed

ITA 238/NAG/2019[2013-14 Quarter3 ]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur14 Oct 2022

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Takkar – (
Section 154Section 200ASection 200A(1)Section 234E

u/s 234E of the Act; involving varying sums, for delay in filing of TDS statement(s), there is hardly any dispute between the parties that this statutory provision itself carries prospective effect from 01.06.2015 whereas all these quarters / assessment years; as the case may be, in issue before us are well before the said date. That being the clinching fact