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.

174 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 22clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai1,172Delhi1,150Mumbai1,057Kolkata729Pune490Bangalore478Jaipur351Ahmedabad339Hyderabad328Patna198Karnataka185Nagpur174Chandigarh163Surat138Amritsar123Raipur117Visakhapatnam112Indore110Lucknow93Cochin72Panaji69Cuttack68Rajkot58Calcutta53SC39Agra30Telangana26Guwahati24Jodhpur18Varanasi13Dehradun12Allahabad12Jabalpur11Orissa5Himachal Pradesh4Rajasthan4Andhra Pradesh3A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Ranchi2A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Kerala1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1Gauhati1

Key Topics

Section 200A138Section 194A66TDS65Section 234E64Section 26349Section 25049Deduction46Condonation of Delay45Section 201(1)

SUNILKUMAR RAJENDRA RAI,NAGPUR vs. ITO, WARD-1(4), NAGPUR

In the result, appeals filed by the assessees are allowed

ITA 286/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur16 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y.Marathe, Sr.Dr
Section 200Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condone the delay and proceed for adjudication. The short point of consideration is whether the imposition of late fee 5. u/s 234E before 01.06.23015 is justified or not? We find that the matter is already covered by the order of Nagpur Bench passed by the same constitution in the case of Bank of India (ITA Nos. 93, 94 and 95/Nag/2023

Showing 1–20 of 174 · Page 1 of 9

...
43
Section 20140
Limitation/Time-bar38
Exemption33

GURPALSINGH CHANANSINGH NAGRA,AKOLA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BANGLORE

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

ITA 206/NAG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri S.G. GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(1)

section 143(1) by the Central Processing Centre on 27/03/2019. 2. During the course of hearing, we find that there is a delay of 203 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed application–cum–affidavit for condonation of delay explaining the cause of Gurpalsingh Chanansingh Nagra ITA no.206/Mum./2023 delay in filing the present

SANJAY SHANKARRAO JADHAO,AMRAVATI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, AMRAVATI CIRCLE, AMRAVATI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 198/NAG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri K.M. Roy

For Appellant: Shri K.P. DewaniFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 143(3)Section 250

22 inform Shri Sanjay Jadhao and counsel for preparation of appeal. In first week of June 2023 it was noted by me that appeal has remained to be filed in the aforesaid case. The delay in filing the appeal is on account of my bonafide mistake and rush of work on my table. It is humbly prayed that delay

VNIT KARMACHARI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA,NAGPUR vs. ITO WARD 1(5), NAGPUR, NAGPUR

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

ITA 134/NAG/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur25 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Abhay AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 250Section 80P(2)(a)

22 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 5. The learned Counsel further submitted that there was a delay of 185 days (excluding COVID period) in filing the appeal before learned CIT(A) and the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee at the threshold itself i.e., by not condoning

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

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)

22,811, and the same was treated by the Assessing Officer as anonymous donation which was taxed under section 115BBC of the Act. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of taxable income. The assessee being aggrieved, carried the matter before the first appellate authority

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)

22,811, and the same was treated by the Assessing Officer as anonymous donation which was taxed under section 115BBC of the Act. The Assessing Officer also initiated penalty proceedings under section 271(1)(c) of the Act separately for furnishing inaccurate particulars of taxable income. The assessee being aggrieved, carried the matter before the first appellate authority

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTIES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 151/NAG/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 307/NAG/2023[2014-15 (FY 2013-14, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTIES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 150/NAG/2023[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 306/NAG/2023[2013-14 (FY 20012-13, Q2)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 284/NAG/2023[2008-09 (FY 2007-08, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 308/NAG/2023[2016-17 (FY 2015-16, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 314/NAG/2023[2013-14 (FY 2012-13, Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 315/NAG/2023[2013-14 (FY 2012-13, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTIES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 153/NAG/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 317/NAG/2023[2014-15 (FY 2013-14, Q4)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTRIES LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CPC (TDS), GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 316/NAG/2023[2014-15 (FY2013-14, Q3)]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

BAJAJ STEEL INDUSTIES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CPC, TDS, GHAZIABAD

Appeals are dismissed

ITA 152/NAG/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur26 Feb 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Ms. Neha Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 200ASection 201Section 250

condone the delay of 2195 days. Accordingly, ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on account of delay. 3. The ld.Authorised Representative(ld.AR) of the assessee pleaded before us that assessee was trying to follow up the issue with jurisdictional TDS Officer. The ld.AR explained that assessee had requested the Income Tax Officer for rectification. However, the Bench specifically

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

22. 2. In its appeal, the assessee has raised following grounds:– “1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in allowing the exemption of Rs. 2,01,39,828 claimed by the assessee trust by relying upon the decision of BABASAHEB RAOSAHEB KOBARANE & ANR v. PYROTEK INDIA P LTD and Others (Civil Appeal No. 2022 @ Special Leave

BANK OF INDIA, DONGARGAON NAGPUR vs. DY.CIT(TDS), CIRCLE-1, NAGPUR

In the result, all the appeals are partly allowed in light of aforesaid directions

ITA 153/NAG/2022[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Jun 2022AY 2010-11

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

condone the delay subject to cost of Rs 500/- for each of the sixteen appeals totaling to Rs 8,000/- to which the ld AR has agreed and submitted his acceptance on behalf of the assessee. The assessee is directed to deposit the said sum and submit the proof thereof to the Assessing officer under intimation to the Registry