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.

28 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10(37)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai346Delhi312Mumbai276Kolkata194Bangalore146Hyderabad143Ahmedabad133Chandigarh131Jaipur119Pune106Raipur75Amritsar54Surat48Indore48Rajkot35Panaji35Nagpur28Lucknow28SC23Cuttack21Visakhapatnam16Cochin13Patna12Guwahati9Dehradun6Varanasi5Jodhpur4Jabalpur4Agra2Allahabad1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 153C85Section 153A43Section 143(3)34Section 6826Section 25020Addition to Income20Condonation of Delay10Section 1329Section 263

M/S PHOENIX INFRA ESTATE INTERNATIONAL LTD,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals by the assessee stand dismissed in limine

ITA 161/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Mar 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durgarao & Shrik.M. Roy, Accountant, Member

For Appellant: Shri Purushotam SahuFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 132Section 143(3)Section 263

condonation of delay are as under:– “A. Applicant has filed the above appeal on against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dated 12/02/2018 passed under section 263 of the Act. The present appeal is filed beyond the period of limitation. The delay is of 2261 Days. Brief facts leading to the delay of filing the appeal are as under

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

Showing 1–20 of 28 · Page 1 of 2

9
Search & Seizure7
Section 143(2)6
Limitation/Time-bar6

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 111/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION & INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 112/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 108/NAG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 109/NAG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2010-11

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

M/S MAHESHWARI COAL BENEFICATION& INFRASTRUCTURE P. LTD,BILASPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals for the assessment year 2009–10 to 2013–14 are partly allowed

ITA 110/NAG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Kumar AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 153ASection 153CSection 250

section 153A(1) read with „Expln-2‟; in absence of this, assessment made u/s153C would be invalid & is liable to be quashed; relied on Goldstone Cements Ltd (2023) (Gau HC); Fortune Vanijya (P) Ltd (2023) (Gau HC).” 40. In the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No.111/Nag/ 2024, for the assessment year 2012-13 along with following additional ground

SANT TUKDOJI NAGRI SHAHKARI PAT SANSTHA LIMITED, HINGANGHAT,HINGANGHAT vs. ITO WARD - 2, WARDHA

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

ITA 356/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur20 Dec 2024AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Shri Kishore P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 144Section 234ASection 80P(2)(a)Section 80P(4)

37, Nandori Road ……………. Appellant Hinganghat 442 301 PAN–AACAS0241C v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–2, Wardha Assessee by : Shri Kishore P. Dewani Revenue by : Shri Abhay Y. Marathe Date of Hearing – 05/12/2024 Date of Order – 20/12/2024 O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, J.M. Captioned appeal by the assessee is against the impugned order dated 06/06/2023, passed

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

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

TAJSHREE AUTOWHEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

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

ITA 400/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Madhav VichoreFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits. 8. It is observed that the appellant has issued 2,00,000 shares each of face value Rs. 10/- to its existing shareholders on a premium of Rs.40/- per share. Thus, the issue price per share stands at Rs.50/-. As the appellant did not furnish any report

VIJAYKUMAR MANIKRAM GAUTAM ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), NAGPUR

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no.471/Nag./2024, for A.Y. 2007–08 is dismissed on this ground alone

ITA 473/NAG/2024[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri Purushotam Sahu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

37,800, vide order dated 26/03/2044 passed u/sec. 143(3) r/w section 153A of the Act. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) turned down the request of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

VIJAYKUMAR MANIKRAM GAUTAM ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), NAGPUR

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no.471/Nag./2024, for A.Y. 2007–08 is dismissed on this ground alone

ITA 474/NAG/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri Purushotam Sahu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

37,800, vide order dated 26/03/2044 passed u/sec. 143(3) r/w section 153A of the Act. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) turned down the request of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

VIJAYKUMAR MANIKRAM GAUTAM ,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(2), NAGPUR

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no.471/Nag./2024, for A.Y. 2007–08 is dismissed on this ground alone

ITA 475/NAG/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri Purushotam Sahu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

37,800, vide order dated 26/03/2044 passed u/sec. 143(3) r/w section 153A of the Act. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) turned down the request of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

VIJAYKUMAR MANIKRAM GAUTAM,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), NAGPUR

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no.471/Nag./2024, for A.Y. 2007–08 is dismissed on this ground alone

ITA 471/NAG/2024[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri Purushotam Sahu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

37,800, vide order dated 26/03/2044 passed u/sec. 143(3) r/w section 153A of the Act. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) turned down the request of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

VIJAYKUMAR MANIKRAM GAUTAM,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), NAGPUR

Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee in ITA no.471/Nag./2024, for A.Y. 2007–08 is dismissed on this ground alone

ITA 472/NAG/2024[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Feb 2025AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Khettra Mohan Roy

For Appellant: Shri Purushotam Sahu, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 153A

37,800, vide order dated 26/03/2044 passed u/sec. 143(3) r/w section 153A of the Act. On being aggrieved, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) turned down the request of the assessee. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee carried the matter in appeal before

SHISHIR KUMAR DAS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-AMRAWATI, ITO BUILDING,AMRAWATI

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

ITA 267/NAG/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Smt. Veena Agrawal, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Section 250 of the Act. 6. I say that, as soon as the order came to my attention, I took immediate steps to file the appeal before your Honors. The delay was unintentional and arose due to circumstances beyond my control. 7. Due to the aforementioned circumstances, the appeal (Form 36) has been submitted with a delay of 145 days

SHISHIR KUMAR DAS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-AMRAWATI, AMRAVATI

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

ITA 266/NAG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Smt. Veena Agrawal, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Section 250 of the Act. 6. I say that, as soon as the order came to my attention, I took immediate steps to file the appeal before your Honors. The delay was unintentional and arose due to circumstances beyond my control. 7. Due to the aforementioned circumstances, the appeal (Form 36) has been submitted with a delay of 145 days

SHISHIR KUMAR DAS,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT/ACIT CIRCLE-AMRAWATI, AMRAVATI

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

ITA 268/NAG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry

For Appellant: Smt. Veena Agrawal, Ld. CAFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha, Ld. Sr. D.R
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

Section 250 of the Act. 6. I say that, as soon as the order came to my attention, I took immediate steps to file the appeal before your Honors. The delay was unintentional and arose due to circumstances beyond my control. 7. Due to the aforementioned circumstances, the appeal (Form 36) has been submitted with a delay of 145 days

M/S SHRIGOPAL RAMESHKUMAR SALES PVT. LTD ,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMISSIONER CENTRAL CIRCLE 1(3), NAGPUR

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 53/NAG/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur30 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke

condone the delay of 702 days in filing of the appeal and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits. 5. The sole dispute involved in this appeal relates to addition sustained by the learned CIT(A) amounting to ` 2,50,00,000, allegedly held to have been received by the assessee in cash. 6. The assessee is engaged

M/S SHREE AGRAWAL COAL INDIA PVT. LTD,NAGPUR vs. A,C.I.T CENT CIR. 1(2), NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 180/NAG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur15 May 2025AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: Shri Sachin V. LuthraFor Respondent: Shri Harshad S. Vengurlekar
Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 2(22)(d)Section 2(22)(e)

condone the delay of 32 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 3. The sole issue for our adjudication relates to the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of unaccounted purchases. 4. Facts in Brief:– In this case, during the year, the assessee is engaged in the business of trading