BharatTax.net
SearchITATHigh CourtsSupreme CourtAI 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.

55 results for “reassessment”+ Condonation of Delayclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai413Delhi346Mumbai339Kolkata273Ahmedabad233Jaipur134Hyderabad129Raipur126Pune123Bangalore93Chandigarh81Surat76Indore65Patna55Amritsar55Cuttack47Rajkot41Nagpur39Visakhapatnam38Cochin37Lucknow26Agra16Guwahati13Dehradun13Panaji11Jodhpur8Ranchi5Jabalpur5Varanasi4Allahabad4

Key Topics

Section 14753Section 270A42Section 14839Section 25036Section 14433Section 153A32Condonation of Delay30Addition to Income29Limitation/Time-bar27Reassessment

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

condonation of delay in each assessment year. In brief, the contention of the assessee is that a survey was conducted on 17.09.2020 and thereafter the assessment in each assessment year was reopened by issuance of a notice under section 148 on 30.06.2021. The assessment order was passed on 31.03.2022 and the assessee has challenged those assessment orders in appeal before

Showing 1–20 of 55 · Page 1 of 3

24
Section 69A20
Section 26317

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

condonation of delay in each assessment year. In brief, the contention of the assessee is that a survey was conducted on 17.09.2020 and thereafter the assessment in each assessment year was reopened by issuance of a notice under section 148 on 30.06.2021. The assessment order was passed on 31.03.2022 and the assessee has challenged those assessment orders in appeal before

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

condonation of delay in each assessment year. In brief, the contention of the assessee is that a survey was conducted on 17.09.2020 and thereafter the assessment in each assessment year was reopened by issuance of a notice under section 148 on 30.06.2021. The assessment order was passed on 31.03.2022 and the assessee has challenged those assessment orders in appeal before

PATNA SMART CITY LIMITED,PATNA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, PTN-W-(21)(91), PATNA

In the result, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed

ITA 314/PAT/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Nov 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 2(45)Section 234BSection 250

condoned by the Ld. CIT(A) as the assessee had a ITA No.: 314/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2022-23 Patna Smart City Limited. sufficient cause for the delay. Since there was no proper compliance before both the Ld. AO as well as before the Ld. CIT(A), in the interest of justice and fair play it was considered by the Bench

RAJESH KUMAR,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD- 3 (2), GAYA

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

ITA 171/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna18 Sept 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115BSection 147Section 234ASection 250Section 271FSection 69A

condone the delay and hears the appeal on merits.” 5. Rival contentions were heard and the record and the submissions made have been examined. Both before the Ld. AO as well as before the I.T.A. No.: 171/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2018-19 Rajesh Kumar. Ld. CIT(A), the assessee could not be represented properly and the Ld. AR requested that

AMAR NATH SINGH,ARA vs. ITO, NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 460/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: The Itat. In This Regard, The Assessee Has Given Explanation Which Is As Under:

Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 253(5)

condone the delay and the appeal is taking for adjudication. 3 Amar Nath Singh 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 04.01.2018 declaring total income at Rs. 5,03,010/- as per information with the income tax department. The assessee had deposited cash in his bank account maintained at Punjab

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 181/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

condonation of delay in filing of appeal, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.” I.T.A. Nos.: 181 & 182/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mahant Pandey. 7. Aggrieved with the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeals before the Tribunal. Before us, it was submitted that the assessee is a Government engineer who carried out the Departmental

MAHANT PANDEY,ROHTAS vs. NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 182/PAT/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna21 Aug 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 271ASection 271FSection 272A(1)(d)

condonation of delay in filing of appeal, the appeal of the appellant is dismissed.” I.T.A. Nos.: 181 & 182/PAT/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Mahant Pandey. 7. Aggrieved with the orders of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the appeals before the Tribunal. Before us, it was submitted that the assessee is a Government engineer who carried out the Departmental

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

SAVITA DEVI,SUPAUL, BIHAR, INDIA vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD-3(4), SAHARSA, SAHARSA,BIHAR

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

ITA 157/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Dec 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 147Section 148Section 149Section 250Section 69

reassessment on the basis of a false information beyond the limitation period envisaged in sec. 149 is illegal and unsustainable. The consequent assessment order is liable to be quashed. 3 in the Penalty Oder CIA remarks in Point 2 Sub Point 6,7,8 and Point 5 Last Para where it is clearly mention to follow the Natural Justice principal

PRERNA AGENCY PVT LTD,KOLKATA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1), PATNA

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 285/PAT/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Patna26 Mar 2025AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 151

delay is hereby condoned. 4. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee M/s Prerna Agency pvt. Ltd. derived income from share trading, filed its return of income for AY 2013-14, and assessment u/s 143(3) of the Act was completed on 29.02.2016. Subsequently on an information received from investigation wing that M/s Prerna Agency

MADHURI DEVI,SAHARSA vs. ITO WARD- 3 (4), SAHARSA

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

ITA 238/PAT/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Feb 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 145(3)Section 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 Learned Assessing Officer, being ITO, Ward-3(4), Saharsa (Here in after called the "AO") has erred in Assessing the appellant on a total Income of Rs 7001665/- as against

SHARDINDU PRASAD SINGH,PATNA vs. ITO, WARD-6(4), PATNA

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

ITA 630/PAT/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna15 Oct 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 147Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. I.T.A. No.: 630/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2016-17 Shardindu Prasad Singh. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal, which are argumentative: “A. For that, on the fact and circumstances of the case, this 2nd appeal arises against an arbitrary, baseless, hypothetical and presumptive incomplete

ROSE BUD MUSLIM EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY,PATNA vs. ITO, EXEMPTION, WARD-1, PATNA

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

ITA 40/PAT/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Patna27 Nov 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 12Section 12ASection 142(1)Section 144Section 250

delay is, therefore, condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:- 1. For that the grounds of appeal hereto are without prejudice to each other. 2. For that the order of the learned assessing officer and also the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is bad both

SMT. RANJU KUMARI,JAMUI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 2 (5), LAKHISARAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 339/PAT/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Patna20 Nov 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115BSection 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 69A

reassessment proceedings under section 148 of the Act, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified. 6. For that the learned CIT (A) has erred passing an ex-party order without allowing proper opportunity of being heard, which is wrong, illegal and unjustified in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7. That the whole order passed

SARIKA CHOUDHARY,PATNA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE-4, PATNA

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

ITA 254/PAT/2024[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Patna04 Apr 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Sonjoy Sarma & Sri Rakesh Mishra

Section 143(3)Section 250

delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. Page 3 of 7 I.T.A. No.: 254/PAT/2024 Assessment Year: 2011-12 Sarika Choudhary. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: “1. For that on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned CIT (Appeal), Patna

SUNITA AGRAWAL,KOLKATA vs. NFAC, DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed on this issue

ITA 148/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna22 Jul 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 10(38)Section 147Section 148Section 38Section 68

delay is hereby condoned. 3. Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee, Smt. Sunita Agarwal, is the wife of Shri Anil Agarwal, filed her return of income for AY 2015-16 on 02.02.2016 declared total income of Rs. 3,58,580/-. The case was reopened u/s.147 of the Act after recording reasons of reopening

MANOJ KUMAR DAS,BEGUSARAI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/PAT/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Patna30 Oct 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: 19/07/2025. The Appeal Is Delayed By Around 37 Days. 4. That The Assessee States That The Reason For Delay Is That The Assessee Is Suffering From Hiv Aids & Is Constantly Under Treatment. Copy Of Medical Treatment Is Enclosed.

Section 115BSection 142(1)Section 144Section 147Section 148Section 250Section 68

delay is hereby condoned and the appeal is admitted for adjudication. 2. On the last date of hearing, none appeared on behalf of the assessee but it was decided to proceed ahead with the adjudication, with the help of Ld. DR. 2.1 This appeal arises from order u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter “the Act”), passed

DEEPAK SHRAWAN BUDHIA,MUMBAI vs. PR. COMMISSIONER OF I.T., PATNA-1, PATNA

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 365/PAT/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Patna19 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI SONJOY SARMA (Judicial Member)

Section 147Section 263Section 40

condone the delay and taking up for adjudication. 4. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the Ld. Pr.CIT called the assessment record and observed that order passed by the AO u/s 147 r.w.s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Act was completed on 19.03.2023 assessed the total income at Rs. 68,24,861/- in which he observed

ANIL KUMAR,WEST CHAMPARAN vs. ITO, WARD- 1 (5), BETTIAH

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

ITA 261/PAT/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Patna13 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 144Section 250Section 271(1)(c)

condone the delay and admit both the appeals for adjudication. 2. The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal raising the following grounds of appeal: I. ITA No. 261/PAT/2025: “1. For that the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [the NFAC] erred on facts and in law in partly allowing the appeal filed by the assessee, vide order passed under section