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.

7 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 120clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai176Chennai170Delhi128Karnataka123Kolkata97Chandigarh92Hyderabad64Bangalore61Pune60Jaipur52Raipur48Calcutta45Ahmedabad30Cuttack25Guwahati18Cochin18Rajkot18Surat16Indore14Lucknow14Amritsar12Patna11Visakhapatnam10Jodhpur7Nagpur7Panaji7SC6Varanasi6Telangana4Jabalpur3Dehradun2Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Agra1Punjab & Haryana1Rajasthan1Himachal Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 26317Section 143(3)6Section 406Condonation of Delay3Addition to Income3TDS3Section 80P2Disallowance2

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

120 days within which the written statement could have been taken on record, expired on 09.05.2020 which was during the lock-down imposed. Therefore, the High Court has refused to condone the delay and take the written statement on record. Having heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties and having considered order dated 10.01.2022 passed

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

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

120; (b) "record" shall include and shall be deemed always to have included all records relating to any proceeding under this Act available at the time of examination by the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner; (c) where any order referred to in this sub-section and passed by the Assessing Officer had been the subject matter of any appeal filed

RAJURA NAGARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,CHANDRAPUR vs. OFFICE OF THE INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5, CHANDRAPUR

ITA 483/NAG/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Feb 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 250Section 80P

condone the delay of 418 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 5. Facts in Brief:– The assessee is a resident AOP (Association of Persons), engaged in the business of providing credit facilities to its members and assessed to tax. For the assessment year 2016-17, the return of income was filed

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

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 3rd Floor

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

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 3rd Floor

GOPAL DENESHCHANDRA TULSHAN ,AKOLA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-3, AKOLA

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 201/NAG/2023[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Sept 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 201(1)(b)Section 40Section 50

delay in filing the appeal. Your honour is most humbly requested to consider the said condonation application sympathetically and admit the same for hearing. 1) Regarding Ground no.1 to 4:– In the assessment order A.O. has disallowed interest expenses at ` 2,03,227, under section 50(a)(ia), the break up of which is as under:– a) M/s. Kach Ghar