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.

14 results for “condonation of delay”+ Revision u/s 263clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai305Kolkata201Mumbai167Delhi119Pune101Hyderabad100Karnataka100Bangalore97Jaipur62Indore55Chandigarh55Ahmedabad53Visakhapatnam39Cochin38Panaji36Cuttack26Surat21Rajkot18Raipur17Amritsar14Nagpur14Patna12Lucknow9Agra5Jabalpur5Jodhpur4Calcutta2Varanasi2Himachal Pradesh2Dehradun2Guwahati2Rajasthan1SC1

Key Topics

Section 26394Section 143(3)26Addition to Income10Condonation of Delay9Revision u/s 2639Limitation/Time-bar8Exemption5Section 12A3Section 250

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

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

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

3
Section 1473
Section 1482
Section 153A2
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

revision order has not doubted any evidences produced by the appellant. However, he made out case of inadequate enquiry, but he erred in not doing minimal enquiry to ascertain the fact that whether the order is erroneous or not. The learned PCIT has relied on the decision of Hon’ble ITAT Bench (E) in the case of AppolloTyres Ltd ACIT

DATTU SAMPAT VANKHEDE,NAGPUR vs. PCIT-2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 581/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Dilip LohiyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 263

revision proceedings and order in this regards. 5. That, in response to order U/s. 263 the assessing officer (NFAC) has passed order U/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 263 on 22/03/2022 and made addition of Rs. 2,32,50,000/-. The deponent/assessee could not preferred the appeals against the order before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), NFAC as the assessee

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

263 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune at Nagpur and immediately filed appeal on 19/03/2025. In support of its contention the assessee society has filed affidavit also. The counsel for the assessee submitted that due to above reason appeal is being filed on 19/03/2025 along with delay application therefore there is delay of 1431 days, which deserves

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

263 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune at Nagpur and immediately filed appeal on 19/03/2025. In support of its contention the assessee society has filed affidavit also. The counsel for the assessee submitted that due to above reason appeal is being filed on 19/03/2025 along with delay application therefore there is delay of 1431 days, which deserves

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

263 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemption), Pune at Nagpur and immediately filed appeal on 19/03/2025. In support of its contention the assessee society has filed affidavit also. The counsel for the assessee submitted that due to above reason appeal is being filed on 19/03/2025 along with delay application therefore there is delay of 1431 days, which deserves

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

delay of 24 days in filing the present appeal is 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

SARA SPINTEX INDIA PVT. LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

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

ITA 56/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.56/Nag/2021 Assessment Year : 2016-17 Sara Spintex India Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Pr.Cit, Gate No.97, 98, Nagpur-2 Dhamnagaon Road, Moha 445 001 Maharashtra Pan : Aapcs5098G Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Shri Mahavir Atal
Section 133ASection 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay and proceed to dispose of the appeal on merits. 4. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. It is engaged in the business of manufacturing and exporting cotton yarn. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2016-17 was filed

VASUNDHARA BAHUUDESHIYA SAMAJIKK SANSTHA,KHAMGAON vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), NAGPUR

In the result, this appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 55/NAG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am Assessment Year: 2015-16 Vasundhara Bahuudeshiya Vs. C.I.T.(Exemptions) Samajik Sanstha, Pune At Nagpur. 1, Vasundhara, Madhav Nagar, Khamgaon-444303. Pan No.: Aaabv 0305 P Appellant Respondent Assessee By: Shri Mahavir Atal (Ca) Revenue By : Shri Piyush Kolhe (Cit-Dr) Date Of Hearing: 27/04/2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/06 /2022 Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. This Appeal Has Been Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. C.I.T.(Exemptions), Pune At Nagpur Dated 23/03/2021 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short, The Act) For The A.Y. 2015-16 Wherein Following Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assesee. “1. Whether The Revision Order Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit By Taking A Recourse To Section 263 Is Illegal & Bad In Law, When The A.O. Has Made Sufficient Enquiries During The Assessment Procedure. 2. Whether The Revision Order Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit, Without Considering Appellant’S Submission Is Illegal & Bad In Law. 3. Whether The Revision Order Passed By The Ld. Pr.Cit Even Though If It Is Termed As Erroneous But It Is Not Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue. As The Donation Has Been Duly Disclosed By The Appellant In Their

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal (CA)For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe (CIT-DR)
Section 253(5)Section 263

U/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act) for the A.Y. 2015-16 wherein following grounds have been raised by the assesee. “1. Whether the revision order passed by the ld. Pr.CIT by taking a recourse to Section 263 is illegal and bad in law, when the A.O. has made sufficient enquiries during the assessment procedure

SAGAR FIBRES PVT. LTD.,YAVATMAL vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 57/NAG/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur02 Sept 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Ms. Alfiya RozieFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 143(3)Section 2(22)(e)Section 263

condone the delay in filing the present appeal. We also find that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide judgment dated 10/01/2022, passed in M.A. no.21 of 2022, in M.A. no.665 of 2021, in Suo-Motu Writ Petition (Civil) no.3 of 2020, the limitation period for filing the appeal was extended upto 29/05/2022. In view of the above, since the present

DR. PANJABRAO DESHMUKH KRISHI VIDYAPEETH KARMCHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT ,AKOLA vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX -1 , NAGPUR

The appeal of the appellant is allowed

ITA 222/NAG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 222/Nag/2018 आयकर धनिाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-2014 Dr Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth Karmchari Sahakari Path Sanstha Akola. (Maharashtra) Pan : Aaaad 3455 D . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बनाम / V/S. Pr Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Nagpur – 440 001 (Mh) . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent }Kjk / Appearances Assessee By : Shri P.K. Dewani Revenue By : Shri Pradeep Headoo सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 15/02/2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 28/04/2022 आदेश / Order Per Jamlappa D Battull, Am; Against The Revisionary Order Of Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-1, Nagpur [For Short “Pcit”] Dt. 31/03/2018 Passed U/S 263 Of The Income- Tax Act, 1961 [For Short “The Act”], Which In Turn Dived Out Of Regular Assessment Order Dt. 10/08/2015 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer-Ward-1, Akola [For Shot “Ao”], The Appellant Assessee Filed This Appeal Before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [For Short “The Tribunal”] U/S 253. Itat-Nagpur Page 1 Of 12

For Appellant: Shri P.K. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo
Section 143(3)Section 253Section 263Section 80P

condones the delay. 5. Concisely stated the facts of the case are; 5.1 The assessee is a registered employee Credit Co-operative society formed and registered under the provisions of Maharashtra State Co-Operative Societies Act, 1960 and engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to exclusively its members who are the employee of Dr Panjabrao Deshmukh Krushi Vidyapeeth

M/S SANJAY CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES,,PARATWADA vs. TH PRINCIPAL C.I.T.-1, NAGPUR

The appeal is dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 46/NAG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur17 Nov 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya
Section 143(3)Section 263

delay of 289 days is condoned. 2 ITA No.46/NAG/2016, A.Y. 2010-11 3. The assessee filed an application dated 11-11-2022 seeking permission to withdraw the present appeal. The relevant extract of the application reads as under : “With all humbleness and if your kindness permit, we do not wish to press this appeal. The present appeal was filed against

CONCRETE DEVELOPERS ,NAGPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, , NAGPUR

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

ITA 60/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur29 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 60/Nag/2021 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 M/S. Concrete Developers 151/152 Anjali Apartment Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur-440 016 (Mh) Pan : Aaafc6294L .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central, Nagpur. ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Headoo, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153DSection 263

condonation of the delay involved in filing of the appeal merits acceptance. 3. Succinctly stated, the assessee firm which is engaged in the business of construction of residential and commercial complexes was subjected to search proceedings u/s 132 of the Act on 01.12.2015. Subsequent to the search proceedings return of income was filed by the assessee u/s.153A