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.

59 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 90(2)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai628Mumbai535Delhi386Kolkata338Bangalore218Hyderabad213Ahmedabad177Karnataka128Jaipur126Pune85Surat82Raipur77Chandigarh69Nagpur59Visakhapatnam59Indore56Amritsar53Lucknow49Cochin45Calcutta41Rajkot32Patna22SC19Cuttack18Allahabad14Jodhpur12Varanasi11Agra9Jabalpur8Guwahati7Telangana5Panaji4Dehradun4Ranchi3Andhra Pradesh2Rajasthan2Orissa1Himachal Pradesh1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1

Key Topics

Section 200A49Section 201(1)46Condonation of Delay43Section 143(3)42Section 20141Section 25040Section 194A30TDS30Section 68

TAJSHREE AUTOWHEELS PRIVATE LIMITED,NAGPUR vs. ACIT CIRCLE-4, NAGPUR

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

ITA 400/NAG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur04 Mar 2025AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Madhav VichoreFor Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe
Section 56(2)Section 56(2)(viib)

condone the delay of 446 days in filing the present appeal and admit the same for adjudication on merit. 5. Facts in Brief:– The assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in the business of Automobiles and Auto Parts. During the year under consideration, the assessee–company allotted addition 2,00,000 shares for a premium of ` 40, per share

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

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Showing 1–20 of 59 · Page 1 of 3

29
Deduction29
Section 26322
Limitation/Time-bar22
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

condone the delay in filing the present appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. However, a cost of ` 5,000, is levied upon the assessee for the delay in filing the petition, which should be paid to the account of The Nagpur High Court Legal Service Committee. In all fairness, the learned Counsel for the assessee agreed

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)

condone the delay in filing the present appeal and proceed to dispose off the appeal on merits. However, a cost of ` 5,000, is levied upon the assessee for the delay in filing the petition, which should be paid to the account of The Nagpur High Court Legal Service Committee. In all fairness, the learned Counsel for the assessee agreed

AKSHAY DEVIDAS TAJANE,CHANDRAPUR vs. ITO WARD -1, CHANDRAPUR

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in terms indicated above

ITA 161/NAG/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur27 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir AtalFor Respondent: Shri Surjit Kumar Saha
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

delay in filing Denial of relief u/s 90 2. 253 Form no.67, should have been at ` 1,94,852 condoned. 2 Shri Akshay Devidas Tajane ITA no.161/Nag./2025 The CPC/Addl. JCIT(A)–1, Guru– gram is not justified in denying Denial of relief u/s 90 3. 253 the relief under section

PANHERA GRAMIN BIGARSHETI SAHAKARI PAT SANSTHA MARYADIT,BULDHANA vs. ITO WARD-2, KHAMGAON, KHAMGAON

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

ITA 520/NAG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur05 Mar 2025AY 2020-21

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

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

section 250 r.w.s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act. That, the order under appeal is served on the Assessee on 14/06/2024 because of which the appeal was to be filed on or before the 13/08/2024. However, the appellant E-filed Form No. 36 on 24/08/2024 and uploaded the signed documents on 25/09/2024, hence there is a delay

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

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

90 days, that longer period shall apply. 3 Deendayal Seva Pratishthan ITA no.572/Nag./2024 IV. It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall also stand excluded in computing the periods prescribed under Sections 23 (4) and 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12 A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and provisos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

2. We have heard both the parties at length and perused the case file. The assessee had filed appeal before ld.CIT(A) against the order under section 200A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 dated 06.08.2015. Thus, the time limit to file the appeal was 30 days Page 3 of 10 Bajaj Steel Industries Limited (13 appeals) [A] ITA.Nos

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

section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code for initiation of corporate Insolvency resolution process against the corporate debtor deserves to be admitted.” 5. Further, the learned Counsel for the assessee also highlighted the contents of the Affidavit furnished for condonation of delay in filing the present appeal, which is also reproduced below:– “We, M/s. Unijules Life Sciences Ltd., (hereinafter