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.

10 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 133clear

Sorted by relevance

Kolkata305Mumbai304Delhi227Chennai200Bangalore138Karnataka122Jaipur116Ahmedabad102Hyderabad81Surat67Pune46Calcutta43Chandigarh36Lucknow34Visakhapatnam30Rajkot30Indore29Patna23Cuttack22Raipur21Amritsar20Nagpur10Varanasi8Allahabad7Guwahati6SC5Cochin4Panaji4Agra4Telangana3Ranchi2Rajasthan2Dehradun2Orissa2Jodhpur1Andhra Pradesh1

Key Topics

Section 26312Section 115B11Addition to Income6Section 1484Exemption4Penalty4Natural Justice4Section 133(6)3Section 143(3)

NAGESHWARA CHARITABLE TRUST,NAGPUR vs. ITO WD 3, EXEMP, NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

ITA 128/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 271(1)(c)

133(6) of the Act was also communicated to the assessee the the reason, as sought by the Assessing Officer, as to why the aforesaid donation should not be treated as anonymous donation under section 115BBC of the Act. 4. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee failed to establish genuineness of donation received of an amount

NAGESHWARA CHARITABLE TRUST,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, EXEMPTION, NAGPUR

3
Condonation of Delay3
Revision u/s 2633
Limitation/Time-bar3

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

ITA 129/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur18 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Vikash Agrawal
Section 115BSection 133(6)Section 271(1)(c)

133(6) of the Act was also communicated to the assessee the the reason, as sought by the Assessing Officer, as to why the aforesaid donation should not be treated as anonymous donation under section 115BBC of the Act. 4. The Assessing Officer concluded that the assessee failed to establish genuineness of donation received of an amount

ANANT RAMRAO CHAVAN,AMRAVATI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMRAVATI

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

ITA 476/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Dec 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 234ASection 250

section 147 of the Act. 3 Anant Ramrao Chavhan 4. It is noted that the date of service of assessment order was 19/01/2020; and the appeal filed before the learned CIT(A) is 10/12/2021. Thus, there was a delay of 661 days in filing the appeal. The learned CIT(A) did not condone the delay and did not admit

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

133(6) and mentioned the same in the assessment order. However, none of the summons or the notices have been uploaded on the system inspite of specific direction given in the said Instruction no. 3/2018 as submitted by the JCIT in his letter dt.24.01.2019 for remedial action,.” The said observation of the Ld.PCIT that AO has not uploaded the summons

ARPITA MATHEW ARUKAKKAL,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 5(3), NAGPUR

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

ITA 501/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalearpita Mathew Arukakkal, Residency Road, Sadar Nagpur- 440001, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Arkpm3965D V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–5(3), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By:Shri.Sapan Usrethe.A.R. Revenue By :Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri.Sapan Usrethe.A.RFor Respondent: Shri.Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 144Section 144BSection 148Section 151(1)

condonation of delay filed during the appellate proceedings. 2 Arpita Mathew Arukakkal 2. On the facts and circumstances of case the learned National Faceless Appeal Centre was not justified in dismissing the appeal on the ground of delay without deciding the appeal on merit and without considering the circumstances occurred in filing the appeal in delay as no notice

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

condone the delay in filing the present appeal as we are satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not presenting the appeal within the prescribed time and the appeal is hereby admitted for adjudication on merits. 7. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is registered as a Public Charitable Trust under the Bombay Public Trust

ABID MUSTAFA KHAN,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD-2(3), NAGPUR

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

ITA 502/NAG/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur10 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleabid Mustafa Khan, 301, Mayfair Residency, Raj Nagar Opp. Green Park, Nagpur 440 013, ……………. Appellant Maharashtra. Pan – Aqipk9595G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–3(2), Nagpur, Maharashtra. Assessee By: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.Dr

For Appellant: Shri K.K. Thakkar. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr.DR
Section 142(1)Section 148Section 148ASection 151Section 69A

133(6) of the Act. Further notice under section 142(1) of the Act was issued and there was no proper compliance the Assessing Officer found that the explanations does not satisfy the sources of cash deposits in the bank account and was treated as unexplained cash credit u/sec 69A of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.46

MADHUR LAXMAN GADIKAR,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 4(1), NAGPUR

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

ITA 406/NAG/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalemadhur Laxman Gadikar, Kharbikar Mohalla, House No.426–B Ward No.27, Golibar Chowk ……………. Appellant Jaganath Gol, Nagpur-440018, Maharashtra, Pan – Avzpg3725G V/S Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–4(1), Nagpur Assessee By :Shri Abhishek Kumar. A.R. Revenue By :Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr. D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Abhishek Kumar. A.RFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha.Sr. D.R
Section 115BSection 148Section 56(2)(vii)Section 69

section 56(2)(vii)(b) of the Act. 4. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A)/Ld. AO is justified in passing an order where no independent enquiry was made or record under Sec 133(6) was called for. 5. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case

CYTEC INDIA SPECIALTY CHEMICALS & MATERIALS PVT. LTD,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2, NAGPUR

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 193/NAG/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur31 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.193/Nag/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16 Cytec India Specialty Chemicals & Materials Pvt. Ltd., Equinox Business Park, The Principal Cit-2, Tower-4, 9Th Floor, Unit Vs No.903, Lbs Marag, Kurla Nagpur. West, Mumbai – 400070. Pan: Aaecc6848D Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Anuj Kisnadwala – Ar Revenue By Shri Kailash G. Kanojiya – Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 26/10/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 31/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Am: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2015-16 Is Directed Against The Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax-2, Nagpur’S Order Dated 23.03.2020 In Proceedings U /S 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961, I Short “The Act”.

Section 119Section 119(1)Section 131Section 133

133 of the Act) is sought to be initiated; or (v) when the functionality to issue communication is not available in the system, the communication may be issued manually but only after recording reasons in writing in the file and with prior written approval of the Chief Commissioner/ Director General of income-tax. In cases where manual communication is required

SHARDASHREE ISPAT LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3, NAGPUR

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 166/NAG/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur08 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripote"नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13

Section 133(6)Section 250Section 68

section 68 unexplained cash credits addition of Rs.45.00 lakhs involving M/s. Muskan Distributors Pvt. Ltd., Shublabh Prints Pvt. 2 Shardashree Ispat Limited Ltd., and Koel Tradecom Pvt. Ltd. for sums of Rs.5.00 lakhs in former and Rs.20.00 lakhs in latter twin instances; respectively. The asessee’s stand all along is that the impugned sums have been routed through banking channels