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.

201 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 4(5)clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,131Mumbai3,970Delhi3,244Kolkata2,171Pune1,841Bangalore1,676Ahmedabad1,395Hyderabad1,217Jaipur919Patna737Surat633Chandigarh574Indore539Nagpur521Cochin490Visakhapatnam439Raipur412Lucknow392Rajkot332Amritsar326Karnataka301Cuttack301Panaji201Agra157Calcutta111Guwahati108Dehradun103Jodhpur96Allahabad72SC62Jabalpur61Ranchi59Telangana48Varanasi37Andhra Pradesh17Rajasthan11Orissa9Kerala7Punjab & Haryana5Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2Gauhati1R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1

Key Topics

Section 234E90Condonation of Delay75Limitation/Time-bar54Section 80P(2)(d)51Section 200A50Section 80P(4)44Section 80P41Section 80P(2)(a)40Deduction

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,PANAJI, GOA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 280/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

4 SCC 613] following which the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir reiterated the same guidelines/directions in the case of ‘Abdul Gani Ganie & Anrs Vs Habibullah Ganie’ [2025 Latest Caselaw 2244 J&K/2]. In view of former judicial precedents, we accordingly advanced on the issue of law of limitation first. ITAT-Panaji Page 5 of 32 Chittibabu Ghanta

Showing 1–20 of 201 · Page 1 of 11

...
29
Section 24928
Section 14423
Penalty21

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,GOA vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 278/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

4 SCC 613] following which the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir reiterated the same guidelines/directions in the case of ‘Abdul Gani Ganie & Anrs Vs Habibullah Ganie’ [2025 Latest Caselaw 2244 J&K/2]. In view of former judicial precedents, we accordingly advanced on the issue of law of limitation first. ITAT-Panaji Page 5 of 32 Chittibabu Ghanta

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,PANAJI, GOA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 281/PAN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

4 SCC 613] following which the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir reiterated the same guidelines/directions in the case of ‘Abdul Gani Ganie & Anrs Vs Habibullah Ganie’ [2025 Latest Caselaw 2244 J&K/2]. In view of former judicial precedents, we accordingly advanced on the issue of law of limitation first. ITAT-Panaji Page 5 of 32 Chittibabu Ghanta

CHITTIBABU GHANTA,GOA vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI, GOA

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 279/PAN/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr Ajaykumar V. [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Azhar Zain [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 132Section 153ASection 153CSection 246ASection 250Section 253(1)

4 SCC 613] following which the Hon’ble High Court of Jammu & Kashmir reiterated the same guidelines/directions in the case of ‘Abdul Gani Ganie & Anrs Vs Habibullah Ganie’ [2025 Latest Caselaw 2244 J&K/2]. In view of former judicial precedents, we accordingly advanced on the issue of law of limitation first. ITAT-Panaji Page 5 of 32 Chittibabu Ghanta

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 170/PAN/2025[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

delay condonation stands rejected. As no case is made out in terms of s/s (5) (supra) in consequence present appeal in view of s/s (3) of section 253 of the Act is barred by limitation, therefore not admitted for adjudication, and in consequence stands dismissed. 26. In result, all three appeals are DISMISSED. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 169/PAN/2025[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

delay condonation stands rejected. As no case is made out in terms of s/s (5) (supra) in consequence present appeal in view of s/s (3) of section 253 of the Act is barred by limitation, therefore not admitted for adjudication, and in consequence stands dismissed. 26. In result, all three appeals are DISMISSED. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT

UNION BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, TDS CIRCLE, PANAJI, PANAJI

Appeals are DISMISSED

ITA 171/PAN/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji14 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Mr C Naresh [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Ms Rijjula Uniyal [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 131Section 133ASection 194ASection 201Section 201(1)Section 250Section 253(1)

delay condonation stands rejected. As no case is made out in terms of s/s (5) (supra) in consequence present appeal in view of s/s (3) of section 253 of the Act is barred by limitation, therefore not admitted for adjudication, and in consequence stands dismissed. 26. In result, all three appeals are DISMISSED. In terms of rule 34 of ITAT

JAP RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED,ANJUNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 5/PAN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Aug 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Prabhakar Anand [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 250Section 253(1)

4. In adjudicating these matters together, the first appeal ITA No. 005/PAN/2024 is taken as lead case, resultantly our adjudication laid in succeeding paragraphs shall mutatis-mutandis apply to remaining appeals. 5. Without touching grounds of appeal and going into merits of the case, we have heard respondent Revenue’s common submissions objecting the condonation of delay, and subject

JAP RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED,ANJUNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 6/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Aug 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Prabhakar Anand [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 250Section 253(1)

4. In adjudicating these matters together, the first appeal ITA No. 005/PAN/2024 is taken as lead case, resultantly our adjudication laid in succeeding paragraphs shall mutatis-mutandis apply to remaining appeals. 5. Without touching grounds of appeal and going into merits of the case, we have heard respondent Revenue’s common submissions objecting the condonation of delay, and subject

JAP RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED,ANJUNA vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE, PANAJI

Appeals stands DISMISSED

ITA 7/PAN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Mr Prabhakar Anand [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 153ASection 250Section 253(1)

4. In adjudicating these matters together, the first appeal ITA No. 005/PAN/2024 is taken as lead case, resultantly our adjudication laid in succeeding paragraphs shall mutatis-mutandis apply to remaining appeals. 5. Without touching grounds of appeal and going into merits of the case, we have heard respondent Revenue’s common submissions objecting the condonation of delay, and subject

SHRI LEO DINIZ,BORDA, FATORDA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INTERNATIONAL TAXATION WARD, PANAJI

The appeal is DISMISSED

ITA 150/PAN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 Feb 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliassessment Years: 2016-17 Leo Deniz Row House No. 6 J P Andrade Residency, Borda Fatorda, Goa-403602 Pan: Amgpd8687A . . . . . . . Appellant V/S Income Tax Officer, International Taxation Ward, Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Represented Assessee By: Mr Omkar Godbole [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 02/02/2026 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/02/2026 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali; This Appeal Is Filed U/S 253(1) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’] By The Assessee Challenging Order Dt.

For Appellant: Mr Omkar Godbole [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Ish Gupta [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 246ASection 250Section 253Section 253(1)

4 of 34 Leo Deniz Vs DCIT ITA No. 150/PAN/2024 AY: 2016-17 5. In terms of pre-amended provisions of s/s (3) of section 253 of the Act, every appeal u/s 253(1) or 253(2) of the Act before the Appellate Tribunal is required to be filed ‘within sixty days of the date on which order sought

JAGANUR VIVIDODDHESH PRATHAMIK GRAMEEN KRUSHI SAHAKAR SANGH NIYAMIT,BELAGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, NIPPANI

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

ITA 454/PAN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji29 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalei T A. No.454/Pan/2025 (A.Y.2017-18 ) Jaganur Vividoddhesh I.T.O-Ward-1, Vs Prathamik Grameen Krushi Nemchand Building, . Sahakar Sangh Niyamit, 747,Ashoknagar, Jaganur, Tq.Chikkodi, Nipani-591237, Dist Belgaum-591305, Karnataka. Karnataka. Pan No: Aabap7922L

Section 80A

section 80AC of the Act are not complied by the assessee and the A.O has denied the claim of deduction u/sec80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act and assessed the total income of Rs.48,49,739/- and passed the order u/sec144 of the Act dated 16.10.2019. 4. Aggrieved by the order, the assessee has filed an appeal before

ACGL BBD EMPLOYEES COOP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BHUIMPAL HONDA SATTARI GOA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 1(1), PANAJ, PANAJI, GOA

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 212/PAN/2024[201718]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji12 Feb 2025

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri G. D. Padmahshaliita Nos. 212/Pan/2024 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Acgl Bbd Employees Co-Op. Credit Society, Ltd. Bhuimpal Honda, Sattari, Bhuimpal, North Goa. Pan : Aaaaa8278M . . . . . . . Applicant V/S Income Tax Officer Ward-1(1), Panaji, Goa. . . . . . . . Respondent Appearances Assessee By : Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. Ar’] Revenue By : Mr Narendra Reddy [‘Ld. Dr’] Date Of Conclusive Hearing : 06/02/2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/02/2025 Order Per G. D. Padmahshali, Am; The Assessee Is In Appeal Against Din & Order No. Itba/Nfac/S/250/2024-25/1066146872(1) Dt. 27/06/2024 Passed U/S 250 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [‘The Act’ Hereinafter] By The National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac’ Hereinafter] Which In Turn Arisen Out Of Order Of Assessment Dt. 19/12/2019 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Act By The Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(1), Panaji [‘Ld. Ao’ Hereinafter] For Assessment Year 2017-18 [‘Ay’ Hereinafter].

For Appellant: Mr S J Kamat [‘Ld. AR’]For Respondent: Mr Narendra Reddy [‘Ld. DR’]
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80PSection 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(d)

delay of one day endorsed by the Registry is supported by well-reasoned affidavit dt. 02/09/2024 executed by the appellant. The undeliberate reason as explained from the affidavit are in our considered view sufficient to pass the tests laid in ‘Vijay V Meghani Vs. DCIT & Anr’ [2017, 398 ITR 250 (Bom)] and ‘Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag

SHRI MALLIKARJUN URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LTD,BELGAUM vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(2), , BELAGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA Nos

ITA 190/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)

delay are condoned and accepting for appeal hearing. 3. First we will consider the appeal No. 184/PAN/2018 for AY 2018-2019 as lead case. ITA Nos. 170&171/PAN/2018 & Ors 7 The Begaum Manfacturers Coop.& Ors v. ITO 4. Brief fact is that all the cooperative societies invested their surplus funds in Cooperative Bank and accordingly the interest was earned

MADABHAVI L. S. M. P. SOCIETY LTD,MADABHAVI vs. ITO, WARD - 1, NIPANI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA Nos

ITA 216/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)

delay are condoned and accepting for appeal hearing. 3. First we will consider the appeal No. 184/PAN/2018 for AY 2018-2019 as lead case. ITA Nos. 170&171/PAN/2018 & Ors 7 The Begaum Manfacturers Coop.& Ors v. ITO 4. Brief fact is that all the cooperative societies invested their surplus funds in Cooperative Bank and accordingly the interest was earned

M/S NERLI PRATHAMIK KRISHI PATTIN SAHAKARI BANK NIYAMIT,NERLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(3), BELAGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA Nos

ITA 182/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)

delay are condoned and accepting for appeal hearing. 3. First we will consider the appeal No. 184/PAN/2018 for AY 2018-2019 as lead case. ITA Nos. 170&171/PAN/2018 & Ors 7 The Begaum Manfacturers Coop.& Ors v. ITO 4. Brief fact is that all the cooperative societies invested their surplus funds in Cooperative Bank and accordingly the interest was earned

THE NUTAN MAHILA URBAN CO-OP CREDIT SOCIETY LTD.,MUNAVALLI vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1 (1), BELAGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA Nos

ITA 181/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)

delay are condoned and accepting for appeal hearing. 3. First we will consider the appeal No. 184/PAN/2018 for AY 2018-2019 as lead case. ITA Nos. 170&171/PAN/2018 & Ors 7 The Begaum Manfacturers Coop.& Ors v. ITO 4. Brief fact is that all the cooperative societies invested their surplus funds in Cooperative Bank and accordingly the interest was earned

SHRI MAHALAXMI URBAN CO-OPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY LIMITED,NANDAGAON vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1, GOKAK

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA Nos

ITA 183/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)

delay are condoned and accepting for appeal hearing. 3. First we will consider the appeal No. 184/PAN/2018 for AY 2018-2019 as lead case. ITA Nos. 170&171/PAN/2018 & Ors 7 The Begaum Manfacturers Coop.& Ors v. ITO 4. Brief fact is that all the cooperative societies invested their surplus funds in Cooperative Bank and accordingly the interest was earned

SHRI ADINATH PATTIN SOUHARDA SAHAKARI NIYAMIT,HEBBAL vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA Nos

ITA 184/PAN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)

delay are condoned and accepting for appeal hearing. 3. First we will consider the appeal No. 184/PAN/2018 for AY 2018-2019 as lead case. ITA Nos. 170&171/PAN/2018 & Ors 7 The Begaum Manfacturers Coop.& Ors v. ITO 4. Brief fact is that all the cooperative societies invested their surplus funds in Cooperative Bank and accordingly the interest was earned

THE BELGAUM MANUFACTURERS CO-OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE LTD,BELGAVI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD - 1(1), BELGAVI

In the result, all the grounds of appeal of the assessee related ITA Nos

ITA 170/PAN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji04 Apr 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Rijula Uniyal, Sr. DR
Section 250(6)

delay are condoned and accepting for appeal hearing. 3. First we will consider the appeal No. 184/PAN/2018 for AY 2018-2019 as lead case. ITA Nos. 170&171/PAN/2018 & Ors 7 The Begaum Manfacturers Coop.& Ors v. ITO 4. Brief fact is that all the cooperative societies invested their surplus funds in Cooperative Bank and accordingly the interest was earned