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.

95 results for “condonation of delay”+ Depreciationclear

Sorted by relevance

Chennai445Mumbai390Delhi266Kolkata240Bangalore132Pune95Hyderabad93Ahmedabad83Chandigarh66Jaipur56Cuttack48Amritsar46Indore39Surat31Visakhapatnam30Lucknow24Cochin24Guwahati16Karnataka16SC14Raipur14Jodhpur10Rajkot10Patna9Allahabad7Nagpur7Calcutta6Agra3Kerala2Panaji2Jabalpur2Varanasi2Dehradun1Telangana1A.K. SIKRI N.V. RAMANA1Ranchi1

Key Topics

Section 143(3)75Addition to Income59Depreciation55Section 12A47Section 1138Section 80I38Disallowance30Section 26329Section 10(20)24Section 148

GURU KRIPA SEVA ASHYRAM,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, EXEMPTION, WARD 1(2), PUNE

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

ITA 703/PUN/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri V L JainFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde
Section 11Section 12ASection 12A(1)(b)Section 143(1)

condonation of delay u/s 119(2)(b) of the Act. The Commissioners will while entertaining such belated applications in filing Form no.108 shall satisfy themselves that the assessee was prevented by reasonable cause from filing such application within the stipulated time. Further, all such applications shall be disposed off by 30.09.2019.” 9. He submitted that the Circular dated 09.02.1978 still

Showing 1–20 of 95 · Page 1 of 5

23
Condonation of Delay23
Section 271(1)(c)21

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1155/MUM/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 543/PUN/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 544/PUN/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1153/MUM/2016[2003-04]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2003-04

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

JAWAHAR LAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,NAVI MUMBAI vs. ACIT PANVEL, PANVEL

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 1154/MUM/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX vs. THE JAWAHARLAL NEHRU PORT TRUST,, RAIGAD

In the result, all the three appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and all the three appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 545/PUN/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Pune30 Sept 2025AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandra

For Appellant: S/Shri Madhur Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: S/Shri Sham Walve, Special Counsel along with Tanzil Padvekar and Bhavik Chheda
Section 10(20)Section 11Section 12ASection 142Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 263

condone the delay for accepting the auditor’s report at a later date has only been given to the ITO and not thereafter, i.e., at the appellate stage. We find no merit in this submission. The CBDT by issuing the Circular dt. 9th Feb., 1978 has treated the provision regarding furnishing of auditor’s report along with the return

ANANDA GORAKHANATH PAWAR,SATARA vs. ASSESSING OFFICER, WARD 3, SATARA, SATARA

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

ITA 1796/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune28 Aug 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1796/Pun/2025 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2018-19 Ananda Gorakhanath Pawar, Vs. Ito, Ward-3, Satara. At Post Ambawade, Khatav, Satara- 415506. Pan : Blhpp6081R Appellant Respondent Assessee By Shri R. C. Doshi : Revenue By : Shri Milind Debaje Date Of Hearing : 28.08.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 28.08.2025 आदेश / Order Per Vinay Bhamore, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.06.2025 Passed By Ld. Cit(A)/Nfac For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Appellant Has Filed The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Cit Has Erred Both On Facts & In Law In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Appellant By Refusing To Condone The Delay Of 26 Days On Grounds Of Period Of Limitation, Notwithstanding The Fact That Appellant Has Submitted The Application & Explained The Reasons For Delay.

For Respondent: Shri Milind Debaje
Section 143(2)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 151ASection 184ASection 4

delay to filing the Appeal should not be condoned especially when he had dealt with all the issues in Appellate Order. 3. The learned CIT has erred both in facts and in law in not dealing with other issues on merits. 4. The Assessment order passed u/s 147 r.w.s

GENERAL INDUSTRIAL CONTROS LTD.,PUNE vs. DCIT CIRCLE 8, PUNE, PUNE

In the result, the order of the CIT(A) is set aside, and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 38/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Dipak P. Ripote & Shri Vinay Bhamore

Section 115BSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 36(1)(va)

condone the delay in filing Form No.10-IC is with ld.CCIT and ld.Pr.CIT. Findings & Analysis : 5. We have heard both the parties and perused the records. In this case, vide order u/sec.143(1), Assessee’s claim for benefit of ITA No.38/PUN/2025 [A] lower tax as per section 115BBA was denied on the ground that Form No.10-IC was not filed electronically

SINDHUDURG ZILLA TOURIST SEVA SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,,SINDHUDURG vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, KUDAL

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1847/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 133ASection 250(6)Section 32

condoning the delay, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. Since the grounds are common in all the appeals, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.1845/PUN/2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 are reproduced hereunder :- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

SINDHUDURG ZILLA TOURIST SEVA SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,,SINDHUDURG vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, KUDAL

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1848/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 133ASection 250(6)Section 32

condoning the delay, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. Since the grounds are common in all the appeals, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.1845/PUN/2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 are reproduced hereunder :- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

SINDHUDURG ZILLA TOURIST SEVA SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,,SINDHUDURG vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, KUDAL

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1845/PUN/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 133ASection 250(6)Section 32

condoning the delay, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. Since the grounds are common in all the appeals, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.1845/PUN/2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 are reproduced hereunder :- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

SINDHUDURG ZILLA TOURIST SEVA SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,SINDHUDURG vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2 , KUDAL

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1846/PUN/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 133ASection 250(6)Section 32

condoning the delay, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. Since the grounds are common in all the appeals, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.1845/PUN/2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 are reproduced hereunder :- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

SINDHUDURG ZILLA TOURIST SEVA SAHAKARI SANSTHA MARYADIT,,SINDHUDURG vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 2,, KUDAL

In the result, all the five appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1849/PUN/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am Sl.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prashant Gadekar
Section 133ASection 250(6)Section 32

condoning the delay, I proceed to adjudicate the appeal of the assessee in the following paragraphs. 4. Since the grounds are common in all the appeals, therefore, for the sake of brevity, the grounds raised by the assessee in ITA No.1845/PUN/2019 for the assessment year 2009-10 are reproduced hereunder :- “1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances

ADVANSYS (INDIA) P. LTD,PUNE vs. ITO 1(1), PUNE

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

ITA 396/PUN/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune19 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.396/Pun/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Advansys (India) P. Ltd., Vs. Ito, Ward-1(1), Pune. Plot No.5-7, Raisoni Industrial, Plot No.5-7, Raisoni Industrial Park, Phase-Ii, Mann, Hinjewadi, Pune- 411057. Pan : Aadca3607P Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am : This Appeal Has Been Filed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Pune Dated 20.11.2018. 2. The Grounds Of Appeal Are As Under :- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A)-1, Pune Erred In Dismissing The Appeal Of The Assessee Appellant In Liminie Against The Assessment Order Passed Making Addition Of Rs.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde

depreciation thereby rejecting the appellant’s prayer for condonation of delay in filing the appeal for days for cogent and sufficient

PASHANKAR AUTO INDIA PVT LTD,PUNE vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 955/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. VazeFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 156Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

condone the delay in both the AYs. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- AY 2013-14 “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee could receive hard copy of the appellate order on only 17/07/2023 for the reasons A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 beyond its control. An affidavit explaining the circumstances is enclosed

PASHANKAR AUTO INDIA PVT LTD,PUNE vs. THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4, PUNE

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 are treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 954/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 May 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree G.D. Padmahshali

For Appellant: Shri Sharad A. VazeFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak
Section 156Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

condone the delay in both the AYs. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- AY 2013-14 “1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, assessee could receive hard copy of the appellate order on only 17/07/2023 for the reasons A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2014-15 beyond its control. An affidavit explaining the circumstances is enclosed

PARAG MILK FOODS PVT. LTD,,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE -1 (1), , PUNE

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

ITA 757/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. Bora, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani, DR
Section 14ASection 28Section 43(1)

delay in assessee‟s appeals is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. ITA No. 756 & 757/PUN/2019 (Assessee) 3. That, on perusal of the grounds of appeals, the first issue emerges from ground No.1 is with regard to disallowance u/sec. 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii). The other issue is with regard to direction of the ld.CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4,, PUNE vs. PARAG MILK FOODS PVT.LTD,, PUNE

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

ITA 489/PUN/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. Bora, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani, DR
Section 14ASection 28Section 43(1)

delay in assessee‟s appeals is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. ITA No. 756 & 757/PUN/2019 (Assessee) 3. That, on perusal of the grounds of appeals, the first issue emerges from ground No.1 is with regard to disallowance u/sec. 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii). The other issue is with regard to direction of the ld.CIT

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 4, , PUNE vs. PARAG MILK FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED,, PUNE

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

ITA 488/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Hon.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas P. Bora, CAFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasnani, DR
Section 14ASection 28Section 43(1)

delay in assessee‟s appeals is condoned and the matter is heard on merits. ITA No. 756 & 757/PUN/2019 (Assessee) 3. That, on perusal of the grounds of appeals, the first issue emerges from ground No.1 is with regard to disallowance u/sec. 14A r.w.r.8D(2)(iii). The other issue is with regard to direction of the ld.CIT