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.

5 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 164(1)clear

Sorted by relevance

Mumbai150Karnataka101Delhi88Chennai88Chandigarh56Bangalore50Kolkata37Cochin31Jaipur30Pune27Visakhapatnam19Hyderabad19Lucknow18Ahmedabad18Patna11Surat8Raipur8Indore7Telangana6Panaji5Jodhpur4Rajkot3Calcutta2SC2Agra2Allahabad2Jabalpur2Cuttack2Rajasthan1Orissa1Andhra Pradesh1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 114Section 12A4Condonation of Delay4Section 80P(2)(a)3Deduction3Disallowance3Revision u/s 2633Section 82Section 119(2)(b)

DEARHOOD FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX, CPC, BENGALURU

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

ITA 202/PAN/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji23 Dec 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.202/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2022-23 ) Dear Hood Foundation, Ddit, Vs. Plot.No.1/S,Kanbargi Cpc, Industrial Area, Bengaluru-560500. Kanabargi.S.O, Karnataka. Belgaum-590015, Karnataka. Pan/Gir No. Aaicd1005D (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) Appellant By Shri.Pramod Y Vaidya.Ar Revenue By Shri.Sanket Deshmukh.Sr.Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 23.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 23.12.2025 Order Per Pavan Kumar Gadale, Jm:

Section 11Section 119(2)(b)Section 8

164 days in filing the appeal before the Hon’ble Tribunal and the assesse has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay. 2 DearHood Foundation. Whereas, the facts mentioned in the affidavit are reasonable and the Ld. DR has no specific objections. Accordingly, condone the delay and admit the appeal. 3. The Brief facts of the case are that

2
Exemption2

RAJA BHAT AND KUMUDA FOUNDATION,BELAGAVI vs. PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , BELAGAVI

The appeal of the assessee is ALLOWED

ITA 270/PAN/2024[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji19 Mar 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Year : 2022-23 Raja Bhat & Kumuda Foundation Plot No. 4, Rs No1368, Kumudini, Sadashiv Nagar, Belgavi-590001 Pan:Aajcr6351B . . . . . . . Appellant

For Appellant: Mr Pramod Vaidya [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr S Manikandan [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 11Section 12ASection 143(1)Section 246A(1)Section 250Section 253(1)Section 8

delay by filing condonation petition. On the other hand, there is no evidence to suggest that the assessee was vigilant in complying the provisions of section 12A(b)(ii) of the Act. Therefore, in the absence of sufficient reasons, there is much less scope for condonation and allowing the exemption now. Placing reliance on the orders of tax authorities below

SHRI JINNAPPANNA CHOUGULE LALBAHADUR CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BELGAUM

In the result, the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 274/PAN/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos.274,275 & 276/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16,2017-18 & 2018-19 ) Shri Jinnappanna Chougule Vs I T O, Lalbahadur Credit Souhard National E Assessment . Sahakari Niyamit, Centre, 2471,Lalbahadur Delhi. Akkamahadevi Chowk, Shirguppi Athani, Belagavi-591242, Karnataka. Pan .No. Aagas8466F (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, shall take up ITA No.274/PAN/2025 for A.Y.2015-16 as a lead case and facts narrated. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order

SHRI JINNAPPANNA CHOUGULE LALBAHADUR CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BELGAUM

In the result, the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 276/PAN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos.274,275 & 276/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16,2017-18 & 2018-19 ) Shri Jinnappanna Chougule Vs I T O, Lalbahadur Credit Souhard National E Assessment . Sahakari Niyamit, Centre, 2471,Lalbahadur Delhi. Akkamahadevi Chowk, Shirguppi Athani, Belagavi-591242, Karnataka. Pan .No. Aagas8466F (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, shall take up ITA No.274/PAN/2025 for A.Y.2015-16 as a lead case and facts narrated. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order

SHRI JINNAPPANNA CHOUGULE LALBAHADUR CREDIT SOUHARD SAHAKARI SANGH NIYAMIT,2471, LALBAHADUR AKKAMAHADEVI CHOWK, SHIRGUPPI ATH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, BELGAUM

In the result, the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 275/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji07 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. Nos.274,275 & 276/Pan/2025 (A.Y. 2015-16,2017-18 & 2018-19 ) Shri Jinnappanna Chougule Vs I T O, Lalbahadur Credit Souhard National E Assessment . Sahakari Niyamit, Centre, 2471,Lalbahadur Delhi. Akkamahadevi Chowk, Shirguppi Athani, Belagavi-591242, Karnataka. Pan .No. Aagas8466F (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent)

Section 80P(2)(a)

condone the delay and admit the appeals. 3. Since the issues involved in these appeals are common and identical, hence they are clubbed, heard and a consolidated order is passed. For the sake of convenience, shall take up ITA No.274/PAN/2025 for A.Y.2015-16 as a lead case and facts narrated. The assessee has raised the grounds of appeal challenging the order