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.

736 results for “condonation of delay”+ Section 2clear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,156Mumbai4,052Delhi3,380Pune2,192Kolkata2,165Bangalore1,693Ahmedabad1,589Hyderabad1,417Jaipur1,024Patna736Chandigarh658Surat652Cochin625Nagpur526Visakhapatnam521Indore474Lucknow437Raipur413Amritsar355Cuttack344Rajkot330Karnataka329Calcutta235Panaji202Agra171Guwahati122Dehradun110Jodhpur105Jabalpur90Allahabad86Ranchi66SC66Telangana62Varanasi38Andhra Pradesh21Orissa13Rajasthan11Kerala9Punjab & Haryana9Himachal Pradesh5A.K. SIKRI ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN2R.M. LODHA ANIL R. DAVE1Gauhati1DIPAK MISRA R.K. AGRAWAL PRAFULLA C. PANT1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1VIKRAMAJIT SEN SHIVA KIRTI SINGH1

Key Topics

TDS86Section 25012Section 26311Section 143(3)8Section 44A8Section 36(1)(va)8Addition to Income8Limitation/Time-bar8Condonation of Delay

THE SAMASTIPUR DISTRICT CENTRAL CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD.,SAMASTIPUR vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DARBHANGA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 508/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) provided various opportunities to the assessee as per para 4 of his order, 7 times opportunities were provided but the assessee did not respond any of the notices. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) after relying on various judgments decided the issue on 10.12.2022 on the basis of material available on record and upheld the order of the AO. 4. Aggrieved from the above order, the assessee filed appeal before the

For Respondent: Sh. Manab Adak, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 144Section 250

condoning the delay. For the sake of convenience, we are reproducing the section 253(3) which is as under: “(3) Every appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2

Showing 1–20 of 736 · Page 1 of 37

...
7
Section 116
Section 143(1)5
Deduction4

M/S MANISH FINLEASE (P) LTD,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-2(1), PATNA

ITA 25/PAT/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Aug 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-2011 Manish Finlease Pvt Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward 2(1), Patna Chandi House Exhibition Road, Patna Pan/Gir No.Aaccm 6252 B (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee By : Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, Ars Revenue By : Shri Indrajeet Singh, Dr Date Of Hearing : 20/06/ 2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 09/08/ 2019 O R D E R Per Bench This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Cit(A)-1, Patna Dated 27.9.2018 For The Assessment Year 2010-2011. 2. The Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Delayed By 51 Days. The Assessee Has Filed Application For Condonation Of Delay Stating The Reasons For Not Filing The Appeal In Time Before The Tribunal. After Hearing The Submissions Of The Parties, We Are Satisfied That The Assessee Had A Bonafide Reason For Not Filing The Appeal In Time. Therefore, We Condone The Delay & Proceed To Decide The Appeal Of The Assessee On Merits.

For Appellant: Shri A.K.Rastogi & Rakesh Kumar, ARsFor Respondent: Shri Indrajeet Singh, DR
Section 133(6)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148(1)Section 68

condone the delay and proceed to decide the appeal of the assessee on merits. P a g e 1 | 71 Assessment Year : 2010 -2011 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal” “1. For that the CIT(A) has erred in affirming the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s.143(3)/147 wherein the Assessing Officer has assessed

DIPAK KUMAR SINGH & SONS HUF,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 6(2), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 647/PAT/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee claimed that the delay was on account of ignorance of law and the assessee was alerted for filing the appeal only when they received a notice proposing levy of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act. Thereafter, the Ld. CIT(A) has discussed the issue of delayed filing with the help of several authorities on the subject and has declined to condone the said delay due to which the appeal was dismissed. 3.1 Further aggrieved with the action of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 45Section 54F

section 5 is proved, the application must not be thrown out or any delay cannot be refused to be condoned. v. In O.P. Kathpalia v. Lakhmir Singh AIR 1984 SC 1744, the Supreme Court of India held that, if the refusal to condone the delay results in grave miscarriage of justice, it would be a ground to condone the delay

BAIJU ROY,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-4(2), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 13/PAT/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna02 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 10(37)Section 133(6)Section 2(14)(iii)Section 45(5)Section 54BSection 54F

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. "Every day’s delay must be explained" does not mean

LAL BAHADUR PANDEY,SARAN vs. ITO, WARD,-2(2), CHHAPARA

In the result, the Stay Application of the assessee is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 507/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borads.A. No. 9/Pat/2024 (In Ita No. 507/Pat/2024) Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Lal Bahadur Pandey,…………………………..Applicant Vill. Bheldi, Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar-841402 [Pan:Bifpp6882H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………….Respondent Ward-2(2), Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar & I.T.A. No. 507/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-2018 Lal Bahadur Pandey,…………………………..Appellant Vill. Bheldi, Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar-841402 [Pan:Bifpp6882H] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………….Respondent Ward-2(2), Chapra, Dist. Saran, Bihar Appearances By: Shri Narendra Kumar, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. D.R., Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. "Every day’s delay must be explained" does not mean

MEENA GUPTA,PATNA, BIHAR vs. ITO, LOK NAYAK BHAWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the Stay Application filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 506/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna27 Mar 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice-(Kz) & Shri Rakesh Mishrai.T.A. No. 506/Pat/2025 Assessment Year: 2016-2017 & S.A. No. 15/Pat/2025 (In Ita No. 506/Pat/2025) Assessment Year: 2016-2017 Meena Gupta,……………...……………..……..Appellant House No. 9/N3, Road No. 11, Rajendra Nagar, Rajendra Nagar S.O., (Patna), Sampatchak, Patna-800016, Bihar [Pan:Addpg7557N] -Vs.- Income Tax Officer,…………………………....Respondent Ward-5(1), Patna, Lok Nayak Jaiprakash Bhawan, Dakbunglow Chauraha, Patna-800001, Bihar

Section 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 249(2)

delay for non-filing of condonation petition within the specified time limit before him in conformity with the provisions of section 249(2

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 307/PAT/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Sept 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

Section 148Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

delay in filing the appeals be not condoned. 2 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society 4. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-section

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 308/PAT/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

Section 148Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

delay in filing the appeals be not condoned. 2 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society 4. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-section

G D MOTHER EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,MUZAFFARPUR vs. ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE, MUZAFFARPUR

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 309/PAT/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Sept 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A. Nos. 307, 308 & 309/Pat/2024 Assessment Years: 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 G D Mother Educational Society,…..…….……Appellant Akharaghat Road, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar [Pan:Aaaag3023A] -Vs.- Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax,..…Respondent Central Circle, Muzaffarpur, Aayakar Bhawan, Near Nehru Stadium, Sikandarpur, Muzzaffarpur-842001, Bihar Appearances By: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, Advocate & Puja Somani, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee Smt. Rinku Singh, Cit(Dr), Appeared On Behalf Of The Revenue Date Of Concluding The Hearing: September 04, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order: September 25, 2024 O R D E R

Section 148Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

delay in filing the appeals be not condoned. 2 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society 4. We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. Sub-section

RAM KUMAR,SUPAUL vs. ITO, 3(5), SAHARSA

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

ITA 464/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication on merits. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the Assessment Order as passed by the lower authorities is bad in law. No reasonable opportunity

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 65/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Jan 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 253(2)

delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication. 1.1 This is a batch of three appeals having additions made on same issue for all the three years under consideration. Accordingly, these three matters are being disposed of by a single order. For the sake of convenience, the appeal

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 67/PAT/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Jan 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 253(2)

delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication. 1.1 This is a batch of three appeals having additions made on same issue for all the three years under consideration. Accordingly, these three matters are being disposed of by a single order. For the sake of convenience, the appeal

DCIT(EXEMPTION) CIRCLE, PATNA vs. M/S DEO MANGAL MEMORIAL TRUST, PATNA

In the result, these appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 66/PAT/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna10 Jan 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, VICE PRESIDENT SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 11(1)Section 2(15)Section 250Section 253(2)

delay in filing of the appeals is hereby condoned and these three matters are admitted for adjudication. 1.1 This is a batch of three appeals having additions made on same issue for all the three years under consideration. Accordingly, these three matters are being disposed of by a single order. For the sake of convenience, the appeal

ARJUN KUMAR SAH,VAISHALI vs. ITO WARD- 1(3), VAISHALI

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

ITA 238/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajesh Kumar & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 139(1)Section 144Section 144ASection 250Section 5Section 69A

2 of 5 I.T.A. No.: 238/PAT/2023 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Arjun Kumar Sah. as there was no compliance on behalf of the assessee although he has given sufficient opportunity. Before the ld. CIT(A), the appeal was filed after a delay of 640 days and ld. CIT(A) did not condone the delay and appeal has been dismissed

GRAM NIRMAN MANDAL,NAWADA vs. DC/AC EXEMPTION, CIR, PATNA, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 336/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna27 Nov 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 10Section 11Section 143(3)Section 250

condoning the delay in filing the Form 10B of the Act. The learned Tribunal after going through the facts of the case took note of the latter circular issued by the Board in Circular No. 16 of 2022 dated 19-07-2022 issued under Section 119(2

RAJ KISHORE UPADHYAY,GOPALGANJ vs. ITO, SIWAN, SIWAN

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 459/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI SANJAY AWASTHI (Accountant Member)

Section 249(4)Section 250Section 271ASection 69A

Section 249(4) of the Act. 2.2 Further, aggrieved the assessee has approached the ITAT with the following grounds: I.T.A. No. 459/Pat/2024 Raj Kishore Upadhyay “1. For that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not condoning the delay of 258 days as sufficient causes were submitted. Due to refusal to condone

SARVAJANIK EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY,GUGULDIH vs. COMMISSIONER OF IMCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), PATNA

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

ITA 44/PAT/2025[Na-N]Status: DisposedITAT Patna09 Dec 2025

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

2. PRAYER 2.1. The REJECTION order may be recalled and registration u/s 12A may be kindly directed to be allowed to the Appellant by condoning the delay. 2.2. Personal hearing may be granted. 2.3. Any other relief that your honors may deem fit may be granted.” 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a Society

SAROJ DEVI,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 6 (4), PATNA

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

ITA 242/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna29 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the Learned CIT(A) has erred in confirming the Assessment Order dated 16.12.2019 as passed u/s 143(3) read

MOHAMMAD SOHEL ALAM,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD 3 (1), PURNEA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 340/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna12 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice-(Kz) & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

2. Refusing to condone delay can result in a meritorious matter being thrown out at the very threshold and cause of justice being defeated. As against this when delay is condoned the highest that can happen is that a cause would be decided on merits after hearing the parties. 3. "Every day’s delay must be explained" does not mean

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX EXEMPTION CIRCLE PATNA, PATNA vs. CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, NAYAY NAGAR

In the result, this appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 342/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Nov 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Vice- & Shri Sanjay Awasthii.T.A. No.342/Pat/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Acit(Exemption), Patna..........................................................……….……Appellant Vs. Chanakya National Law University, Nayay Nagar.............……...…..…..Respondent Mithapur, Patna, Bihar – 800001. [Pan: Aaajc0528M] Appearances By: Shri Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri A. K. Rastogi, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 18, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : November 21, 2024 Order Per Sanjay Awasthi: 1. The Present Appeal Has Been Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 07.02.2024 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 1.1 In This Case, There Were Primarily Two Issues Which Were Before The Assessing Officer, Namely, The Issue Of Delayed Filing Of Form 10 Which Was Required U/S 11(2) R.W.S. 13(9) Of The Act & Secondly, The Issue Of An Amount Of Rs.3,58,00,000/- Which Was Added As Technically Being A Receipt Which Had Not Been Offered For Tax By The Assessee. Needless To Say, The Amount Of Rs.3,58,00,000/- Was Added & The Benefit Of Carry Forward Of Surplus Income Was Denied Since The Form 10 Was Not Filed In Time. 2. This Matter Was Carried In Appeal Before The Ld. Cit(A) & There The Issue Of Rs.3,58,00,000/- Was Allowed As Relief On The Ground That The Impugned Amount Was Apparently Debited Internally & Shown As

Section 11(2)Section 250

condonation of delay in furnishing the Form No.10 as required under section 11(2) r/w section 13(9) and the consequential