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.

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

Sorted by relevance

Chennai4,143Mumbai3,978Delhi3,114Kolkata2,190Pune1,825Bangalore1,681Ahmedabad1,389Hyderabad1,134Jaipur928Patna746Surat636Chandigarh572Indore538Nagpur518Cochin470Visakhapatnam421Raipur412Lucknow389Amritsar327Rajkot320Karnataka301Cuttack297Panaji201Agra147Calcutta105Guwahati104Dehradun97Jodhpur92Allahabad67Jabalpur64SC63Ranchi59Telangana47Varanasi37Andhra Pradesh17Rajasthan10Orissa9Kerala7Punjab & Haryana6Himachal Pradesh4A.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

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) shall be filed within [two months] from the end of the month in] which the order sought to be appealed against is communicated to the assessee or to the [Principal

Showing 1–20 of 746 · Page 1 of 38

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

AGLOWMED LIMITED,PATNA vs. ADIT(CPC), BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 95/PAT/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Apr 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma]

Section 2Section 2(24)Section 2(24)(x)Section 3Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iv)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

5 days in filing of the appeal by the assessee. We after perusing the petition for condonation are convinced that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time and hence delay is condoned and appeal is admitted. 4. At the outset, ld. DR submitted that the grounds of appeal relating to disallowance made

JCIT(IN-SITU), CIRCLE-1, PATNA, PATNA vs. TECHNOCULTURE BUILDING CENTRE PRIVATE LIMITED, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes\nand Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 41/PAT/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Patna03 Jun 2025AY 2020-21
Section 142(1)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

condoning the delay. Since\nboth the appeals have inter-connected issues hence, they are being heard\ntogether for simultaneous adjudication.\n\n2. These appeals arise from the order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act,\n1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax\n(Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi vide order dated\n12.12.2024

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 48/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Jha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 44A

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee are:- (a) in ITA No. 48/Pat/2020: 1. For that the appellate order passed u/s. 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. For that the ld. CIT(appeals) has not been justified in confirming the order passed

M/S NORTH BIHAR DISTRIBUTOR,PURNEA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), PURNEA

In the result, appeals of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 68/PAT/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawal

For Appellant: Shri R. K. Jha, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rupesh Agrawal, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250Section 271(1)(c)Section 271BSection 44A

condone the delay in filing the appeal before us and take up the matter for adjudication. 4. Grounds taken by the assessee are:- (a) in ITA No. 48/Pat/2020: 1. For that the appellate order passed u/s. 250 of the Act is bad in law. 2. For that the ld. CIT(appeals) has not been justified in confirming the order passed

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

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 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

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

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

condone the delay in filing the appeal before the Commissioner. Similarly, it has been used in section 5 of Indian Limitation Act, 1963. Whenever interpretation and construction of this expression has fallen for consideration before Honble High Court as well as before the Honble Supreme Court, then, Honble Court were unanimous in their conclusion that this expression is to 5

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

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

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 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 3 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society condoned the highest that

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

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 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 3 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society condoned the highest that

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

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 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 3 ITA No. 308/PAT/2024 (A.Y. 2019-2020) G D Mother Educational Society condoned the highest that

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

Section 5 of the Limitation Act should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice.” 2.3. The present case at hand reveals that the order u/s 144 of the Act dated 28.11.2019 passed by ITO and the appeal has been filed on 30.09.2021. It is not in dispute that since March, 2020 the entire State of West Bengal

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)

5. With the assistance of ld. Representatives, we have gone through the record carefully. A perusal of the impugned order would reveal that ld. CIT(Appeals) has not adjudicated the appeal on merit, rather dismissed it saying that “since the inordinate delay in filing the appeal has not been condoned, consequently the appeal of the appellant becomes

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

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 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

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)

condone the delay in filing the application u/s 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act in the interest of natural justice but no valid reason for the delay for filing Form No. 10AB for regular registration was given. Therefore, it was held that the assessee failed to prove the genuineness of its activities claimed to have been carried

OOSMANIA TRUST,MUZAFFARPUR vs. CIT (E), PATNA, PATNA

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

ITA 519/PAT/2025[2025-26]Status: DisposedITAT Patna24 Feb 2026AY 2025-26

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12ASection 12A(1)(ac)

section 12A(1)(ac) the delay in filing the application for renewal of registration may please be condoned and issue may be remanded to the desk of the CIT(E) to consider the application of the assessee in accordance with law. Further now the assessee Trust has already made an addendum to the trust deed incorporating the dissolution clause, copy

M/S GEETANJALI ESTATE PVT LTD,PATNA vs. PR. CIT-1, PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 20/PAT/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna05 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

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

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 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 6 Assessment Year: 2013-2014 M/s. Geetanjali Estate Pvt. Ltd. condoned the highest that can happen

PAPPU KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 5 (4), PATNA

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

ITA 322/PAT/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna25 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

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

Section 249Section 253Section 3Section 5

1. Ordinarily a litigant does not stand to benefit by lodging an appeal late. 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

EASTERN FOOD INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD 2 (1), PATNA

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are dismissed as withdrawn

ITA 271/PAT/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Jun 2025AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri D.V. Pathy, ARFor Respondent: Shri Ashwani Kr. Singal, DR

1. That this is an application for condonation of delay in the filing of the present appeal.\nPage | 2\nITA Nos. 270 & 271/PAT/2024\nEastern Food Industries Pvt. Ltd.; A.Υ. 2012-13 & 2013-14\n2. That the appellant states that the order in appeal was passed on 10.05.2018. The\nappellant as per the provisions of the Act was required