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.

13 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 246A(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Delhi166Indore89Pune77Chennai70Mumbai67Raipur50Bangalore46Panaji32Cochin25Kolkata22Chandigarh17Nagpur13Hyderabad12Visakhapatnam12Jaipur11Patna11Amritsar9Ahmedabad8Lucknow5Jodhpur3Cuttack3Agra2Surat2Dehradun2Allahabad1Rajkot1Telangana1Varanasi1Guwahati1Jabalpur1Karnataka1

Key Topics

Section 271C26Section 201(1)14Section 194A12Section 246A(1)(c)10Limitation/Time-bar10Section 2509TDS9Section 78Penalty

HASANTE BURHANIAH FIDAYYIAH TRUST,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS) WARD-1, NAGPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeals for A

ITA 9/NAG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain & Shri Arun Khodpia

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Dewani, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Kolhe, CIT–DR
Section 200ASection 234ESection 250

condone the delay in filing the present appeals and proceed to dispose off the appeals on merits. 5. Since both the aforesaid appeals relate to the same assessee involving only common issue, except variation in figures, which arose out of identical set of facts and circumstances, therefore, as a matter of convenience, these appeals were heard together and are being

M/S UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD,NAGPUR vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

8
Section 253(1)(a)6
Section 234E5
Addition to Income4

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

ITA 380/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur12 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 7

condone the delay of 864 days. 7. While going through the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A), we find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal, because there was no response on a number of occasions. However, we find that the learned CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order and in this regard

M/S UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

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

ITA 381/NAG/2024[2013-14]Status: HeardITAT Nagpur12 Dec 2024AY 2013-14

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 7

condone the delay of 864 days. 5 M/s. Unijules Life Sciences Ltd. ITA no.381/Nag./2024 7. While going through the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A), we find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal, because there was no response on a number of occasions. However, we find that the learned

M/S UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

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

ITA 223/NAG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur06 Dec 2024AY 2015-16

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 7

condone the delay of ____ days. 7. While going through the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A), we find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal, because there was no response on a number of occasions. However, we find that the learned CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order and in this regard, here

M/S UNIJULES LIFE SCIENCES LTD.,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-2(1), NAGPUR

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

ITA 220/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur28 Nov 2024AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Kapil HiraniFor Respondent: Shri Sandipkumar Salunke
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 7

condone the delay of 824 days. 7. While going through the impugned order passed by the learned CIT(A), we find that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal, because there was no response on a number of occasions. However, we find that the learned CIT(A) has not passed a speaking order and in this regard

M/S. RAI UDYOG LTD.,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (TDS), NAGPUR

In the result, these twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 311/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 311 & 312/Nag/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rai Udyog Limited 1, Rajat Sankul, Opp. Bus Stand, Ganesh Peth, Nagpur-440018 Pan: Aaccr6008G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer (Tds) Hq-1 / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds), Nagpur . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By These Twin Appeals The Assessee Challenged Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044245542(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1044244849(1) Both Dt. 28/07/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2014-15 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 154Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 24Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act on 18/02/2021 with a delay of 1014 days. During the appellate proceedings the assessee was granted as many as three opportunities vide separate notice dt. 21/05/2022, 07/06/2022 and 07/07/2022, however these remained unresponded. In the absence of evidence justifying the delay the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of limitation

RAI UDYOG LTD.,NAGPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER (TDS), NAGPUR

In the result, these twin appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 312/NAG/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur21 Mar 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliआयकर अपऩल सं. / Ita No. 311 & 312/Nag/2022 निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Rai Udyog Limited 1, Rajat Sankul, Opp. Bus Stand, Ganesh Peth, Nagpur-440018 Pan: Aaccr6008G . . . . . . . अपीलार्थी / Appellant बिधम / V/S Income Tax Officer (Tds) Hq-1 / Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax (Tds), Nagpur . . . . . . . प्रत्यर्थी / Respondent द्वधरध/ Appearances Assessee By : None For The Assessee Revenue By : Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. Dr’] सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 21/03/2024 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21/03/2024 आदेश/ Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; By These Twin Appeals The Assessee Challenged Against The Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1044245542(1) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1044244849(1) Both Dt. 28/07/2022 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appellate Centre [‘Nfac’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2014-15 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: None for the AssesseeFor Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 154Section 194ISection 201(1)Section 24Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act on 18/02/2021 with a delay of 1014 days. During the appellate proceedings the assessee was granted as many as three opportunities vide separate notice dt. 21/05/2022, 07/06/2022 and 07/07/2022, however these remained unresponded. In the absence of evidence justifying the delay the Ld. NFAC dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of limitation

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 7/NAG/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals, the Ld. NFAC placing reliance on catena of judicial precedents came to dismissed these appeals in limine on a technical ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT

BANK OF INDIA, DHARAMPETH,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals, the Ld. NFAC placing reliance on catena of judicial precedents came to dismissed these appeals in limine on a technical ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT

BANK OF INDIA, BUTIBORI,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 8/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals, the Ld. NFAC placing reliance on catena of judicial precedents came to dismissed these appeals in limine on a technical ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT

BANK OF INDIA, ITWARI ,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, (TDS) RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals, the Ld. NFAC placing reliance on catena of judicial precedents came to dismissed these appeals in limine on a technical ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT

BANK OF INDIA, DONGARGAON,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals, the Ld. NFAC placing reliance on catena of judicial precedents came to dismissed these appeals in limine on a technical ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT

BANK OF INDIA,NAGPUR vs. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, TDS, RANGE-1, NAGPUR

Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5/NAG/2023[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur22 Mar 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S. S. Godara & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Pratik Sadrani [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Abhay Marathe [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 194ASection 201(1)Section 246A(1)(c)Section 250Section 253(1)(a)Section 271C

246A(1)(c) of the Act. Without going into merits of case, in the absence of evidence justifying/explaining inordinate delay in filing these appeals, the Ld. NFAC placing reliance on catena of judicial precedents came to dismissed these appeals in limine on a technical ground of limitation. ITAT-Nagpur Page 2 of 6 Bank of India Vs JCIT