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.

4 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 10Aclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai97Delhi92Mumbai76Kolkata57Ahmedabad51Bangalore45Raipur44Hyderabad40Pune36Jaipur35Visakhapatnam13Surat12Rajkot9Chandigarh6Indore5Lucknow5Amritsar5Patna4Nagpur4Jodhpur3Cuttack3Guwahati3Agra3Calcutta2Telangana2Varanasi2Cochin2Karnataka2Allahabad1Jabalpur1SC1Orissa1

Key Topics

Section 80G(5)15Section 80G13Exemption4Section 80G(5)(iii)3Section 102Section 12A2Natural Justice2

CHINMAYA SEVA TRUST,NAGPUR,NAGPUR vs. CIT (EXEMPTION), CIT (E), INCOME TAX OFFICE, PMT BUILDING, SHANKAR SETH ROAD, PUNE

In the result, the appeal of the assesee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 347/NAG/2023[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Jul 2024AY 2023-24

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

For Appellant: Shri Naresh Jakhotia, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Benjwal, CIT.Dr
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

section 80G(5) of the Act, it is evident that the time limits prescribed therein are mandatory and the Commissioner of Income Tax has no power to condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB. The said legal position further gets fortified by the fact that the CBDT on multiple occasions had extended the time limit in filing

DEESHA MEDICAL AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION,AMRAVATI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS), PUNE

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

ITA 284/NAG/2024[00]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Jun 2024

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

For Appellant: Shri Swapnil GawandeFor Respondent: Shri Kailash C. Kanojiya
Section 10Section 12ASection 35Section 80GSection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

10A/ Form 10AB upto 30th June, 2024, in respect of certain provisions of section 10(23C)/ section 12A/ section 80G/ and section 35 of the Act with a view to avoid genuine hardships to taxpayers.” Deesha Medical And Education Foundation ITA no.284/Nag./2024 3. In this case, the assessee filed The assessee has filed application No.CIT EXEMPTION, PUNE/2023- 24/12AA/12727

DHARMA JAAGRAN NYAAS CHANDRAPUR,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD-3, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 424/NAG/2025[2026-27]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Apr 2026AY 2026-27

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Khettra Mohan Roydharma Jaagran Nyaas Ito Ward – 3 Pathanpura, Samadhi Ward, Vs Bsnl, Rttc Bldg. Chandrapur, Nagpur Nagpur – 440001 [Pan: Aactd0729R] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Madhav Vichare, Ca Revenue By Shri Pankaj Kumar, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing 27.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 01.04.2026

Section 10Section 119Section 12ASection 80G(5)Section 80G(5)(iii)

condone the delay in filing application in Form No.10AB. It is evident that the time limit prescribed under clause (iii) of first proviso to section 80G(5) of the Act for filing Form No. 10A

BHARTIYA UTKARSH MANDAL,NAGPUR vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTIONS, PUNE

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 26/NAG/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2022-23

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

For Appellant: Ms. Shikha LoyaFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 80GSection 80G(5)

10A, but the Form was filed well before extended due date. The action of Id. CIT in rejecting the application made in good faith is improper and unjustified. 2 Bhartiya Utkarsh Mandal (3) That the learned CIT erred in law and on facts in rejecting the application for registration due to an alleged venial and technical breach without going into