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.

5 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 117clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai158Karnataka124Delhi122Mumbai121Pune85Kolkata58Bangalore46Raipur44Jaipur36Calcutta35Ahmedabad33Chandigarh30Panaji30Hyderabad29Lucknow12Surat10Visakhapatnam8Telangana8Cuttack7SC7Allahabad6Varanasi6Jodhpur5Guwahati5Nagpur5Rajasthan4Amritsar4Indore3Rajkot3Orissa2Cochin2Andhra Pradesh1Agra1

Key Topics

Section 2638Section 234E7Section 200A4Section 143(3)3Section 1543Section 40A(2)(b)3TDS3Condonation of Delay3Section 68

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

2
Addition to Income2

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

PANKAJ UTTAMCHAND KATARIA ,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICE WARD -3, AMRAVATI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 34/NAG/2018[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur07 Nov 2022AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.34/Nag/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2012-13 Pankaj Uttamchand Kataria, Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Amravati. Kataria Agencies, Nawathe Plot, Danwantri, Amravati. Pan : Aibpk3441Q Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri G. J. Ninawe Date Of Hearing : 26.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 07.11.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Nagpur [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 21.12.2016 For The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. At The Outset, There Is A Delay In Filing The Present Appeal Of 317 Days. The Appellant Filed A Condonation Petition Stating That The Delay In Filing The Present Appeal Had Occurred On Account Of The Appellant Pursuing The Alternative Remedy By Filing The Petition U/S 154 & The Order U/S 154 From The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Was Received On 02.09.2017. Thereafter, The Counsel Of The Appellant Was Busy In Attending His Father, Who Is Aged About 83

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri G. J. Ninawe
Section 154Section 40A(2)(b)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 5. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual engaged in the business of wholesale trading of batteries under the name and style “M/s. Katariya Agency”. The return of income for the assessment year 2012-13 was filed on 20.09.2012 disclosing total income of Rs.14

BANK OF INDIA,SIHORA BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC(TDS), GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 104/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

117,120& 130/Nag./2022 (Assessment Years :2013–14 &2014–15) Bank of India, Tumsar Branch Nagpur Zonal Office 3rd Floor, CSD department Kingsways …………… Appellant Nagpur–440 001 PAN No: AAACB0472C 4 Bank of India v/s ACIT, CPC,TDS(Ghaziabad) Uttar Pradesh–201 010 ..…….………. Respondent ITA No.114/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Bank of India, Takalghat Branch Nagpur Zonal Office

BANK OF INDIA ,PRASHEONI BRANCH vs. ACIT,CPC,TDS, GHAZIABAD

In the result, all the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 111/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur01 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S

117,120& 130/Nag./2022 (Assessment Years :2013–14 &2014–15) Bank of India, Tumsar Branch Nagpur Zonal Office 3rd Floor, CSD department Kingsways …………… Appellant Nagpur–440 001 PAN No: AAACB0472C 4 Bank of India v/s ACIT, CPC,TDS(Ghaziabad) Uttar Pradesh–201 010 ..…….………. Respondent ITA No.114/Nag./2022 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Bank of India, Takalghat Branch Nagpur Zonal Office